Karnataka Court January 2015 Judgments
Sri Avinash Lala Chandani Vs. Sri P a Niranjan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-20-2015
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE20H DAY OF JANUARY2015BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA HRRP NO.105/2014 BETWEEN:1. 2. SRI AVINASH LAL CHANDANI S/O. LATE. HEMANDAS AGED ABOUT66YEARS, SMT. SUMITHA LAL CHANDANI W/O SRI. AVINASH LAL CHANDANI, AGED ABOUT50YEARS, 3. MAS. ANIL S/O SRI. AVINASH LAL CHANDANI, AGED ABOUT26YEARS, 4. MS. SUSHMITHA D/O SRI. AVINASH LAL CHANDANI, AGED ABOUT18YEARS, ALL THE RESPONDENTS ARE R/AT No.E-10, NEW NO.23, FIRST FLOOR, SHANKAR MUTT MAIN ROAD, SHANKARPURAM, BANGALORE56000 (By Sri: VIVEK REDDY, SR. ADV. FOR SRI:SUBBA REDDY K N ) ... PETITIONERS AND:1. 2.3. 2 SRI P A NIRANJAN S/O LATE SRI P.S. ASWATHANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT53YEARS, R/AT NO.3123, 19TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, BSK2D STAGE, BANGALORE56007 SRI P.A. SRINATH S/O LATE SRI P.S ASWATHANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT46YEARS, SRI P.L. VIJAYAKUMAR S/O LATE SRI P.S ASWATHANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT53YEARS, RESPONDENTS2AND3ARE R/AT NO.2, VASAVI TEMPLE, VISVESWARAPURAM, BANGALORE56000 ... RE...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammed Hussain Vs. Ramakrishna and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2015
(Prayer: This Writ Petition Is Filed Under Articles 226 And 227 Of The Constitution Of India With A Prayer To Quash The Order Dt.7.11.14, Passed By The Court Of Xxiv Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City On Ia.No.16 In Os.No.9403/06, Produced At Ann-J And Etc.,) 1. Petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.9403/2006. Being aggrieved by the order dated 7.11.2014 allowing I.A.No.16 filed under Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC, the present writ petition has been filed. 2. Respondents herein filed a suit seeking for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and also mandatory injunction against the defendant to demolish the building already constructed in the suit schedule property. 3. The case of the plaintiffs is that they are the absolute owners of 30 guntas of land in Sy.No.26/3A situated in Nagavara village. However, the defendant, on the guise of purchase of land measuring 40 x 60 feet in...
Tag this Judgment!Shrikanth Vs. Union of India
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2015
1. The petitioner submits that fourth respondent-Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation) Office Gulbarga, engaged his service as driver in the year 2000. Thereafter, the said office at Gulbarga has been transferred to Belgaum and as a result the petitioner was also transferred to Belgaum and as such till today he is working in service as engaged by the fourth respondent pursuant to internal communication dated 8-8-2000 (Annexure-A). He has been paid salary out of expenditure as per proceedings of the Director of Income Tax (intelligence) dated 28.10.2014 and 10.11.2014. Pursuant to the internal communication dated 8-8-2000, Deputy Director of Income-Tax is directed to engage/appoint driver-cum-peon on contingent basis which resulted in appointing/engaging the services of this petitioner. There was correspondence between the Additional Director of Income Tax, Belgaum and the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vide letter dated 15.11.2007 with regard to regularization of s...
Tag this Judgment!Fathima Shaheen and Another Vs. The Government of Karnataka, By its Se ...
Court: Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on: Jan-19-2015
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents No.2 to 4 to release the salary of the petitioner for the year 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 at Rs.2,200/- per month for the services they rendered as Science Teacher in the Arabic Madarsa at Ishtul-Islam-Arebic-Madarsa at Yadula Colony, Gulbarga; and etc.) 1. Government of India launched a scheme called "Modernisation of Arabic Madrasas" and under the said scheme, Government of Karnataka has established Directorate for Urdu and Minority Languages Schools in Karnataka to implement the said scheme. 2. The petitioners in these petitions were appointed under the said scheme as Teachers and their appointment was approved as per order Annexure-B dated 16th March 1999. As per the scheme, the Government of India sanctioned and released budget to Madrasa for payment of salary to the teachers and to purchase science equipment to the schools. Petit...
Tag this Judgment!Dilip Kumar Vs. Union of India, Ministry of Finance and Another
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2015
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the impugned endorsement dtd 29.08.2006 produced as Annx-B, declare that Rule 9 of Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982 is ultra vires Customs Act, 1962 and Rule 12 of Central Excise (Appeals) Rules, 2001 is ultra vires the Central Excise Act, 1944 and etc.,) 1. An advocate enrolled in the Karnataka State Bar Council on 04.08.2006 and a legal practitioner has presented this petition as a Public Interest Litigation, on 20.11.2014, calling in question the endorsement dated 29.08.2006, Annexure-B on the assertion that no minimum qualification is provided for in the matter of appointment as special counsel, while, the only criterion is that the special counsel must be a retired officer from the department having experience in indirect taxation. Grounded on the contention that in the absence of necessary guidelines, Rule 9 of the Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982 is ultra vires Customs Act...
Tag this Judgment!Maheshwari Foundation Vs. Director of Income-tax (Exemptions), Bangalo ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2015
N. Kumar, J. 1. The assessee has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the Tribunal upholding the order passed by the Commissioner holding that the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of renewal of recognition under Section 80G of the Income-Tax Act, 1961(for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The assessee is a Trust formed on 12.07.2000. It filed an application for renewal of the recognition granted under Section 80G of the Act on 31.03.2008. The authorities called for certain details in connection with the renewal of the recognition and the same was furnished. The assessee was running a Hostel for students, for which charges were collected for both boarding and lodging. According to the assessee it was treated as a charitable purpose and Section 80G benefit was given up to 31.03.2008. Even after the amendment to Section 2(15) of the Act without prejudice to its applicability, in view of the provisos, the position will be the same if the gross revenue fro...
Tag this Judgment!M/s. Gimpex Limited. Vs. State of Karnataka by Police Inspector, Rep. ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2015
(Prayer: This Petition is filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India R/W Section 482 Cr.P.C., Praying to set aside the Order Dated 12.11.2014, Directing Freezing of the Bank Accounts of Petitioner Vide Annexures-A TO D and etc.) 1. The respondents 1 and 2 during investigation of Crime No.5/2014, registered against petitioner for offences punishable under sections 379 and 420 r/w 120B IPC, sections 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and also for offences punishable under sections 21 and 23 r/w 4(1), 4(1)(A) of MMDR Act, 1957, by exercising powers under section 102 Cr.P.C., have frozen bank account of petitioner, the details of which are as follows:- 1. Bank of Baroda - 05290200001744 - Cr.Rs.19,92,660.06 2. ING Vysya Bank, Chennai - 407011004918 - Cr.Rs.1,17,750.55. 3. ING Vysya Bank, Bellary - 111011007814 - Cr.Rs.1,18,261.69 4. Punjab National Bank - 0305008700095869 - (Dr.Rs.8,91,90,442.91) 2. Out of the aforestated accounts, account menti...
Tag this Judgment!Dilip Kumar Vs. Union of India
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-19-2015
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE19H DAY OF JANUARY2015PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.D.H.WAGHELA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.53909 OF2014(GM-RES)PIL BETWEEN : DILIP KUMAR, ADVOCATE, S/O H.P ANANTHARAJ URS, AGED ABOUT45YEARS , R/A NO.1375/A, 3 C MAIN E- BLOCK, II STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE 560 010. (By Sri. SRIDHAR G, ADV.,) AND1 UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE ROOM NO.46, NORTH BLOCK ... PETITIONER2NEW DELHI - 110 001. REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT SECRETARY (REVENUE) 2. CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS C-WING, 5TH FLOOR HUDCO VISHALA BUILDING BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE NEW DELHI REPRESENTED BY ITS CORPORATION ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DTD2908.2006 PRODUCED AS ANNX- B. DECLARE THAT RULE9OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS) RULES, 1982 IS ULTRA VIRES CUSTOMS ACT, 1962 AND RULE12O...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Machine Tool Manufacturer's Assn, Bangalore Vs. State of Karnat ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petitions are filed under Art.226 of the Constitution praying to quash annexure T dated 5.12.2013 and annexure U demand notice dated 6.12.2013 by the 5th respondent, etc.) Petitioner, an industry association promoting the cause of machine tool industry in the country and established the Bangalore International Exhibition Centre (BIEC) where industrial exhibitions of machine tools and conferences to promote trade and commerce are held from time to time, is before this Court seeking to quash the order dated 5.12.2013 - annexure T and the demand notice dated 6.12.2013 - annexure U passed by the 5lh respondent and also to declare that the petitioner's premises at the BIEC is not a 'marriage hall' as defined under the Karnataka Tax on Luxuries Act, 1979 and therefore, not chargeable to luxury tax. In the alternative, petitioner has sought for declaring that S.3-C r/w S.2(5-B) of the KTL Act as ultra vires Entry 62 of List II of VII Schedule to the Constitution or to read down ...
Tag this Judgment!Ganesh Prasad Vs. The Secretary, Sri Biligiri Education Society (R), B ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
(Prayer: This W.P. is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to call for the Entire Records EAT No. 1/2012 on the file of the Court of District Judge and Eat at Chamarajanagar and be pleased to set aside the Judgment and Order Passed in EAT No. 1/2012 Dt. 22.8.2014 Vide Annx-F.) 1. Petitioner has assailed order dated 22/8/2014 passed by the Education Appellate Tribunal, Chamarajanagar, ("EAT" for short) in EAT No. 1/2012 (Annexure-F to the writ petition). 2. Briefly stated the facts are that, the 3rd respondent had filed an appeal under Section 94 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 ("the Act" for short), being aggrieved by his removal from service of 1st respondent institution. By judgment dated 1/7/2010, the EAT allowed his appeal and ordered for reinstatement of 3rd respondent in service forthwith, with backwages and consequential benefits. According to petitioner's counsel, that order was challenged by the respondent institution in W.P.Nos. 26934-935...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »