Karnataka Court April 2009 Judgments

Mysore Minerals Limited, Bangalore. Vs. Veerabhadra Vahana Engineers P ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(4)KantLJ711(DB),2009(3)KCCR2090(DB),ILR2009KAR2339; 2009(4)KarLJ711

These two writ appeals arise out of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.12727 of 2004, dated 23-6-2007 and 3-8-2007 wherein the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and quashed the communication dated 14-10-2003 and has directed the respondent-M/s. Mysore Minerals Limited to supply the balance quantity of Iron Ore Fines at the rate which was prevailing as on the date of filing the writ petition and has further directed the writ petitioner to pay interest on Rs. 40 lakhs at the rate of 6% p.a. from 14-10-2003 till the date of payment and has ordered that revised rate hall not carry any interest.2.1 The material facts of the case leading upto these appeals with reference to the rank of the parties in the writ petition are as follows:2.2 W.P.No.12727 of 2004 was filed seeking for quashing of the communication dated 14-10-2003 issued by the respondent in the writ petition and for directing the respondent to honour its commitment under the letter of intent-A...

Anantdas Jeevandas Amichand and ors. Vs. the Land Acquisition Officer ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(6)KarLJ315

ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. The land belonging to the petitioners was acquired for the public purpose. Suffice it to say in a reference case namely LAC No. 14 of 1984, the Reference Court fixed the market value at Rs. 750/- per gunta with all statutory benefits. The said award was put into execution. The petitioners filed their memo of calculation. The Executing Court has granted the request of the petitioners. But, however, has restricted it from the date of decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sunder v. Union of India : AIR 2001 SC 3516 : (2001)7 SCC 211. The said observation is questioned in this petition.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that having regard to the fact that the petitioners have been awarded interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of taking possession and all other statutory benefits including the 15% interest on the additional amount which is awardable under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the Executing Court was not justifie...

Pramod Foods Private Limited Vs. Nil

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2009]94SCL110(Kar)

ORDERH.G. Ramesh, J.1. In both these petitions, the petitioner - M/s. Pramod Foods Private Limited ('transferor company') and the petitioner - M/s.John Distilleries Limited ('transferee company') have sought for sanction of the Scheme of Amalgamation at Annexure-A, so as to be binding on the transferor company and the transferee company and their respective shareholders and creditors and all other persons. Hence, both the petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by this order.2. The transferor company was incorporated on 19.6.1985 under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 with the Registrar of Companies, Karnataka, Bangalore to carry on the business of manufacture, conversion, procession, production, packing, refining, maintaining, exporting, importing, buying, selling, rendering of services of all and every Kind and acting as agents of all types and forms of food stuffs and eatables including biscuits, bread, cakes, pastries etc. The registered office of die transf...

V. Nagaraj S/O Varadappa Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Chief Secre ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR2009Kant170; ILR2009KAR3060; 2009(5)KarLJ165:2009(3)KCCR1939

ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. Election to Karnataka Legislative Assembly was held on 10-5-2008 and the petitioner had contested the election as an independent candidate in Gandhinagar Constituency, Bangalore. In the results announced, the 5th respondent was declared elected. The petitioner had filed this Election Petition originally with the following prayers:a). to preserve and, or to verify all the subject 213 of electronic voting machines of the Gandhinagar constituency No. 164, Bangalore City by an expert software engineer;b) to appoint panel of the experts engineers as court commissioners to verify all the subject 213 electronic voting machines of the Gandhinagar constituency, Bangalore City so far as manipulation with the secret software code (and thereby, diverting the recording of voting pattern on pro-rata basis so manipulated in f/o the 5th respondent);c) to set aside the declaration of election of the 5th respondent that upon, the subject electronic voting machines were to be p...

Kumara Swamy S/O Somashekar Vs. Dharme Gowda S/O Late Shanthamallegowd ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(4)KCCR2907; 2010(2)KarLJ336; 2010AIR(Kar)352(NOC)

K.N. Keshavanarayana, J. 1. The appellant in this second appeal who was defendant No. 5 in O.S. No. 7/90 on the file of the Civil Judge, Chikmagalur has questioned the legality and correctness of the judgment dated 24.9.2002 passed by the Principal District Judge, Chikmagalur in R.A. No. 15/98 allowing the said appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree of the Trial Court dismissing the said suit and decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs holding that the plaintiffs are entitled for equal share in the suit schedule properties. 2. Respondent Nos. 1 to 9 were the plaintiffs in the Trial Court. Respondent Nos. 10(a) to (d) and 11 to 14 were the defendants 1(a) to (d), 2, 3, 4, and 6 in the said suit. The plaintiffs filed the suit for partition and separate possession of the properties described in schedule to the plaint. The properties described in the schedule are agricultural lands. There are three items of the properties. Item - (a) land bearing Sy.No.52/1 measuring 20 guntas, Item...

V. Channappa S/O Chikkavenkatrayappa Vs. Channamma W/O Byrappa,

Court: Karnataka

K.N. Keshavanarayana, J.1. This second appeal is by the un-successful plaintiff in O.S. No. 115/1999 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr. Dn) and JMFC, Gudibanda, Kolar District. Respondents - 1 to 3 were Defendants- 1 to 3 in the trial Court. The sole plaintiff filed the suit in O.S. 18 of 1997 on the file of the then Munsiff of Chikkaballapur, which was later transferred to the Court of Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Gudibande and re-numbered as O.S. No. 115/1999 for specific performance of the contract in respect of the agricultural land bearing Sy. No. 62/11 measuring 1 acre 12 guntas situated in Mandikal Hobli, Chikkaballapur Taluk.2. The 1st defendant is the mother and Defendants - 2 and 3 are her sons. One Byrappa was the husband of the 1st defendant and father of Defendants - 2 and 3. According to the case of the plaintiff, the 1st defendant for herself and on behalf of Defendants - 2 and 3 during their minority as their Natural Guardian and also as the manager of the joint family, agree...

H.G. Ramesh S/O Gullappa Vs. the State of Karnataka by Its Secretary, ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(5)KarLJ152:2009(6)AIRKarR442(D.B).

ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. This writ petition is filed by the applicant in Application No. 4941/2003 on the file of Karnataka Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal) Bangalore, being aggrieved by the order dated 26.2.2008 wherein the Tribunal has dismissed the application.2. The writ petitioner herein filed Application No. 4941/2003 on the file of the Tribunal seeking for striking down of the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on compassionate grounds) (Amendment) Rules, 1998 wherein Rule 5 has been amended and also the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on compassionate grounds) (Second amendment) Rules, 2000 as unconstitutional and to quash the endorsement dated 17.4.2003 with a direction to the respondents to consider the application of the applicant to the appointment on compassionate ground dated 18.6.2001 and to provide an appointment as per Rule 5 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1998.3. It is the case of the ap...

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., a Company Registered Under the Indian Com ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2009KAR4172; 2009(4)KCCR2769; 2009(6)AIRKarR15(D.B)

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. The appellant/plaintiff entered into a written agreement at Ex.P.1 dt 2.3.1983 with Resp. No. 1 (Deft. No. 1) for purchase of 7 flats at the rate of Rs. 350/- per sq. ft. in addition to the said rate the plaintiff had to pay Rs. 1500/- for each flat for car parking space, Rs. 10500/- towards deposit and Rs. 1500/- for the incidental expenses. The agreement stipulates that the vendor shall secure necessary clearance and permission from the competent authorities. The sale deed to be executed within three months from the date of the agreement.2. The plaintiff paid a sum of Rs. 2851956.25/- towards part of sale consideration. The agreement stipulates that the possession to be delivered on the date of the registration of the sale. However, Deft. No. 1 delivered possession of the property to the plaintiff on 23.3.1983. The Deft. No. 2 and 3 are the partners of the Deft. No. 1.3. There was misunderstanding between the parties regarding the terms of agreement and faciliti...

Global Stone India Limited Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2009)25VST602(Karn)

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. Writ petition by a dealer who is assessed to tax under the provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003.2. It appears, the petitioner was aggrieved by the assessment order passed against him under the provisions of the Act and has preferred an appeal to the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.3. It appears, in the meanwhile, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes has caused a Circular No. 12 of 2008-09 dated December 3, 2008, copy of which is produced as annexure A to the writ petition, and circulated amongst all authorities including the appellate authority functioning under the Act to apprise them that some of the dealers who are in appeal before the appellate authority are in the habit of producing the statutory forms such as forms C, F, E and H which enable them to claim certain concession for the first time before the appellate authority; that they would not have filed such forms before the assessing authority but would seek commensurate r...

Surya Organic Chemical Private Limited Vs. Commercial Tax Officer (Rec ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2009)26VST536(Karn)

ORDERD.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. The writ petition by an assessee under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, 'the Act') who it appears was in arrears of payment of tax and is particularly aggrieved that a demand notice for realization of a sum of Rs. 80,49,741 as per notice dated November 10, 2008 (copy at Annexure E) is one not based on any factual or legal premise but in fact one overlooking the payment of taxes made by the petitioner to the extent of Rs. 64,27,821; that notwithstanding the petitioner having paid this amount of arrears of sales tax which had been demanded for payment by the petitioner and the petitioner though had paid, a fresh demand for higher amount is made in terms of the impugned notice and therefore the demand notice at annexure E should be quashed by issue of a writ of certiorari.2. The petitioner's only grievance being that an amount of Rs. 64,27,821 though had been remitted to the Department by way of demand draft, had not been give...