Karnataka Court July 2010 Judgments

Om Shakti Sc/ St Akd Minority Credit Co-operative Society Limited. Vs. ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1.The complaint, in the instant case, prays to initiate contempt proceedings against the accused for having disobeyed the older of the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Bangalore, dated 23.2.2007 passed in CEP No.1227/06-07 vide Annexure-B.2. Learned counsel for the complainant, at the outset, submitted that the instant contempt proceedings may be dismissed as not pressed.3. The submission is placed on record.4.The contempt petition, filed by the complainant is dismissed as not pressed at the risk of the counsel appearing for the complainant and complainant...

Rasiklal Ratilal Thakkar,smt. Sharada Rasiklal Thakkar. Vs. Vysya Bank ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1.This Company Application 225/09 is filed for amendment of the cause-title, in view of the change in the constitution of the respondent-Bank.2.Application is not opposed. Hence CA 225/09 is allowed. Petitioner to carry out the amendment....

Official Liquidator of the Mandya National Paper Mills Limited. Vs. Sr ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1.Learned counsel for the Official Liquidator submits that during the pendency of this application, they have filed two separate applications in compliance of the office objections. In view of this development, learned counsel for the Official Liquidator submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the application. Accordingly, the application is heieby rejected as withdrawn....

CA. Subbaiah, S/O. Achaiah, Aged About 57 Years, Vs. Sri. Hanumantaray ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1.This contempt petition is filed by the complainant with a prayer to initiate contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the accused and punish him in accordance with law for disobedience of the order dated 5.1. 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 210/2010 vide Annexure-A.2.We have heard the learned Senior counsel appearing for the complainant and learned Additional Government Advocate for accused.3.After careful perusal of the statements made in the counter affidavit dated 12.7.2010 and the endorsement issued by the accused dated 7.7.2010 in pursuance of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No. 10/2010, it emerges that, the representation submitted by the petitioner has been considered and endorsement has been issued by the accused as per Annexure-Rl. Therefore, the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court has been complied with. Hence, the instant contempt proceedings is dropped, reserving liberty to the complainant t...

M/S.Nikitha Build-tech (P) Ltd. Vs. M/S.Natural Textiles Pvt Ltd.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2010KAR4722

ORDER1. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and respondent.2. This petition is filed to review the order made by this Court in MFA 4130/2010 dated 27.05.2010 wherein this Court had dismissed the appeal at the stage of admission holding that an interim application filed under Section 9 of the Act is not maintainable. However, this Court had not noticed Rules 9(1) and 10 of High Court of Karnataka Arbitration (Proceedings before the Courts) Rules, 2001 (for short 'the Rules'). Rules 9(1) and (10) of the Rules provide for entertaining an interim application pending an application under Section 9 of the Act.3. In the light of this legal position which has been brought to our notice by learned Counsel for petitioner, we feel that order dated 27.5.2010 suffers from a mistake apparent on the face of the record. Therefore, the order made in MFA No.4130/2010 dated 27.05.2010 is recalled and the appeal is restored to file. Accordingly, the Review Petition is allowed....

The Commissioner of Central Excise . Vs. M/S Solaris Chemtech Ltd

Court: Karnataka

1.This appeal is by the revenue, challenging the orders passed by the First and Second Appellate Authorities holding that the respondent is entitled to refund of excise duty under Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short,hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The appeal was admitted to consider the following substantial question of law: Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal have committed an error of law holding that the respondent is entitled for refund as there was no unjust enrichment since credit note has been issued by ignoring the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s.MRF Ltd. V/s. Commissioner of Central Excise. Madras (1997 (92) ELT 309 (SC) wherein it was held that the duty was chargeable on the price prevailing on the date of actual removal as shown by the assessee and the subsequent reduction in the price could not create a right in favour of the assessee?2. The respondent is a manufacturer of caustic soda falling under Ch...

B.K. Basavalingappa, S/O. Sri. Kurugoddappa Vs. Chitradurga GramIn Ban ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2010KAR4071

1. The appellants herein being aggrieved by the common order dated 2nd August 2005 passed in Writ Petition No. 19239/2000 c/w. Writ Petition No.9279/2000 and Writ Petition No.43485/1999 by the learned Single Judge, have presented this writ appeal. In the writ petition filed by the respondent Bank, it had sought for quashing of the award dated 23rd September 1999 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court, Bangalore and consequently, to declare that the Bank is justified in imposing upon the deceased employee the punishment of dismissal from service with effect from 18th March 1994. In the other two writ petitions, the appellants had sought for a direction, directing the Bank and the Regional Labour Officer (Central) to implement the award in its entirety, granting all the consequential benefits and to quash the award dated 23rd September 1999, in so far as it relates to denial of remaining 50% back wages.2. The brief facts of the case are that, the delinq...

Mr.C.Naganna S/O Late Karichaluvasetty Major, Vs. M/S Dunford Fabrics ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1.This application is filed by the applicant to condone the delay in filing the claim petition.2.I perused the averments made in the application and I am convinced with the explanation for the delay in making the claim petition. Accordingly, the application is hereby allowed. Delay filing the claim petition is condoned....

Smt. Gowramma Vs. the Spl. Land Acquisition Officer and Others

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2010KAR4186

ORDER1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the judgment dated 21.03.2009 in LAC No. 267/2004 passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bangalore Rural district.2. Under the provisions of the National Highways Authority of India Act, 1988 (for shortthe Act'), the National Highway Authority of India (for short the Authority') was constituted. The object of the Authority is to develop, maintain and manage the national highways. The Authority had taken up the development of National Highway No. 4 connecting from Chennai to Mumbai. As a part of development of national highway No. 4 the Authority notified lands in survey No. 94/1 measuring 4 guntas, survey No. 84/2 measuring I W guntas arid survey No. 94/3 measuring Vi gunte situated Sompura Village. Nelamangala taluk, Bangalore district. An award came to be passed awarding a compensation of Rs.20.32,931/ in respect of the lands and buildings. In the course of enquiry ...

M/S.Jnana Sarovara Educational Trust, Sri.Sudhakar Shetty, S/O Sanjeev ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1.Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks leave of the court to withdraw the petition. Petitioner is permitted to withdraw the petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn....