Karnataka Court November 2009 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. S.N. Murali Mohan

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2010]320ITR144(KAR); [2010]320ITR144(Karn)

K.L. Manjunath, J.1. The legality and correctness of the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, in I.T.A. No. 253/Bang/ 1998, is called in question by the Revenue.2. The case is pertaining to the assessment year 1991-92. The respondent-assessee filed the return of income on January 31, 1992, declaring the total income as Rs. 19,66,223 and the same was revised by filing a revised return on February 13, 1992, declaring the income as Rs. 21,18,823. Before filing the return of income, a search was conducted on the business premises on November 6, 1990, and several incriminating documents were seized. During the course of search, a statement was also recorded under Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.3. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer proceeded to hold that cash of Rs. 16,85,900 was seized during the search as the unaccounted cash of the assessee and the other two members of the joint family, namely, his father and brother. Accordingly, a su...

Karnataka State Financial Corporation Represented by Its Deputy Genera ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERH.G. Ramesh, J.1. This writ petition by Karnataka State Financial Corporation ('KSFC' for short) is directed against the order dated 05.06.2007 (Annexure-M) passed by the Appellate Authority for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction, New Delhi, rejecting the petitioner's Appeal No. 304/06. By the impugned order, the Appellate Authority has confirmed the order dated 20.09.2006 (Annexure-L) passed by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction ('BIFR' for short) in Case No. 321/1998 directing the petitioner-KSFC to issue a 'no dues certificate' to respondent No. 3 - a Sick Industrial Company.2. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the orders passed by the BIFR and the Appellate Authority which are produced as Annexures-L & M respectively.3. The case of the petitioner-KSFC is that it had leased a Diesel Generator Set (3.8 MW/4750 KVA) which was purchased for Rs. 10.33 crores to respondent No. 3-Company and in that connection, respondent No....

Sri C.J. Singh Son of Late Atam Singh Kochar Vs. State of Karnataka Re ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. By consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, all these matters were listed and heard together and matters are disposed of by this common order.2. W.P. No. 936/2006 is filed by one Sri C.J. Singh seeking for issuance of a direction to respondents 1 & 2 viz., State of Karnataka and Chairman, Bangalore Development Authority to exercise jurisdiction vested in it under the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act (hereinafter called as KT & CP Act in short) and make such inspection and pass orders taking into consideration the concept of planning in respect of the intended construction activity being put up by respondent No. 7, (hereinafter called as a Pvt. Ltd., Company) in Sy. No. 19/2, 147/4 and 148/2 of Pattandur Agrahara, Bangalore East Taluk, Bangalore and further direct the respondent No. 4, Deputy Commissioner, to take action against 7th respondent-a Pvt. Ltd. Company for having violated by it, the conditions imposed in the conversion order, quash the...

Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Now Represented by Its ...

Court: Karnataka

Subhash B. Adi, J.1. This appeal is by the insurer, questioning the award dated 26th June 2006 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Davangere (hereinafter referred as 'the Commissioner').2. Respondent No. 1 is the claimant. Respondent No. 2 is the owner of the vehicle. Respondent No. 1 filed a claim petition before the Commissioner interalia alleging that, he was working as a coolie (Hamal) with the respondent No. 2. On 3.12.2004, he was travelling in the mini lorry bearing No. KA-17-9497 belonging to respondent No. 2. He had gone to unload maize at Davangere market. When the said lorry reached Kakkaragol-Avaragol road, on account of the rash and negligent driving of the driver, it turned turtle on the left side as a result of which, all the maize bags fell down and in the said accident, he got serious injuries on his waist, left leg, right hand, body and suffered fractures. He was taken to C.G. Hospital, Davangere, where he took one month's treatment. Dr. G. Madhukar...

Associated Cement Companies Limited, a Company Incorporated Under the ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERK.L. Manjunath, J.1. The substantial question of law arises in this appeal is whether the petitioner herein has to pay the turnover tax on the sale of packing material based on the notification dated 30-3-1994 at the reduced rate of tax of second sale at 1% in stead of 2.5%.2. The facts leading to this case are as hereunder:The assessee is a manufacturer of cement which sells the cement in bags and the bags for selling the cement is purchased as packing material by the assessee which according to the assessee had suffered sales tax at the time of purchase of MT bags. For the assessment year 1-4-1994 to 31-3-1995, the assessee filed returns under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. The contention of the assessee before the Assessing Officer was that in view of the notification dated 30-3-1994 in respect of the bags used as package material is liable to pay at 1% and not at 2.5%. The contention of the assessee has been rejected by the Assessing Officer and he has been cal...

Samson M. Goudar S/O M.S. Goudar Vs. General Manager (a and Hrd) Kptcl

Court: Karnataka

ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The undisputed facts are:The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant on 6-10-1975 while one N. Manjunathan was appointed as an Assistant on 24-12-1975. Attached to the post was the pay scale of 512-20-60-1210. The petitioner as well as N. Manjunathan were promoted as Senior Assistants on 21-04-1981 and 18-05-1981, respectively, and paid salary of Rs. 750/- in the pay scale of 630-30-75-1405. As on 1.10.1981, the petitioner was extended an increment, in the post of Sr. Assistant, since he entered service in the month of October, and drew the pay of Rs. 780/- while N. Manjunathan drew Rs. 750/- on the same day as the entitlement to normal increment was in the month of December, the month in which he was appointed. Thereafter wards, the petitioner was promoted as an Assistant Accounts Officer with effect from 16-11-1981 in the pay scale of 780-50-75-1630 and paid Rs. 830/-, while N. Manjunathan too when promoted as an Assistant Accounts Officer with effect from...

N. Kamalamma W/O Late K.V. Nanjunda Setty Since Dead by Lrs, K.S. Nage ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERA.S. Pachhapure, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the concurrent findings of the Courts below rejecting her application filed under Section 21(1)(a)(h)(f) and (j) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as 'the 1961 Act' for short), confirmed in Rent Revision 16/1985 by the District Judge, Tumkur.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this revision are as under:The petitioner herein filed a petition under Section 21(a)(h)(f) and (j) of the Act of 1961 before the Trial Court seeking eviction of the respondent herein and to grant the vacant possession of the petition premises bearing Khatha No. 2004/1981, Door No. 65, Ravi Talkies Road, KR Extension, Madhugiri Town, Madhugiri, Tumkur District, described in the schedule to the petition.The petition premises belong to Sri. K.G. Venkatararnana Setty who died on 20.11.1980 without any issues and leaving behind the petitioner, his sister, as his only heir, as his wife had predeceased him. It is averred that the pe...

M. Hemananda and ors. Vs. the Secretary, Education Department and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Anand Byrareddy, J.1. Heard the Counsel for the appellants and respondents 2, 4 and 5.2. The facts of the case are as follows:The appellants are students of the Bangalore University pursuing either the 3 year or 5 year Law course in the BES College of Law, Bangalore. The appellants are under the semester scheme of the L.L.B course. Their grievance is that they are students who have failed in certain subjects, but who are not permitted to take up the examinations for those failed subjects in the ensuing semester examination, on the footing that the university has been consistently following a practice that, the examinations for the 3 year L.L.B course which consists of six semesters and the examinations for the 5 year LL.B course which consists of ten semesters are conducted every six months. But, a failed candidate belonging to a odd semester, namely, I, III or V semester in the 3 year course or I, III, V, VII and IX semester in the 5 year course would be permitted to take the examinat...

S. Prakasha S/O. S.M. Siddappa, Vs. the Principal Secretary, Departmen ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The petitioners, employees of the second respondent company when chargesheeted for acts of misconduct, participated in the enquiry, whence, this enquiry officer submitted a report holding the charges proved loading to the order dt. 26.7.2003 of the disciplinary authority, dismissing the petitioners from service. Since an industrial dispute raised by the association was pending adjudication before the Indusrial Tribunal, Mysore, the second respondent - employer filed an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (for short 'the Act') for approval of the dismissal by the Tribunal. At the same time, the association espousing the case of the petitioners approached the Labour Conciliation Authority to refer the dispute for adjudication, which was declined by the first respondent. The application filed by the employer invoking Section 33(2)(b) of the Act, was allowed by the Tribunal and approval was granted by order dt. 17.1.2008. The pe...

Ekantha Reddy G. S/O. Late G. Basappa Vs. State of Karnataka by Its Se ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. The petitioner's appointment as a Lecturer in the 4th respondent Aided Institution, with effect from 16.12.1981, was approved from the said date by order dt. 7.8.1982 of the third respondent, while, the 5th respondent college was admitted to grant-in-aid by order dt. 11.2.1987, of the 2nd respondent with effect from 16.7.1986. The petitioner having rendered total service of 26 years 15vdays, retired on 31.12.2007, on attaining the age of superannuation. The respondent Nos. 3 to 5, It is alleged, reckoned 21 years 5 months 16 days as total service rendered by the petitioner, denying 4 years and 5 months of service when the 4th respondent institution was not admitted to grant-in-aid, to determine the quantum of pensionary benefits which the petitioner was entitled, on retirement, by order dated 22.03.2008, Annexure-'L'. Hence this Writ Petition for the following reliefs:a) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 22-2-2008 vide Annexure -'L', bearing...