Karnataka Court March 2016 Judgments
Ravi Subramanyaam and Others Vs. State of Karnataka, by its Secretary ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-14-2016
(Prayer: These Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to call for records from the R2 Commissioner (HRandCE), Bangalore and quash the Order dt 18.6.09 passed by R2 Commissioner vide Annex-A and Order dt 16.3.09 vide Annex-B by R2.) 1. The petitioners are before this Court assailing the order dated 18.06.2009 and the order dated 16.03.2009 impugned at Annexures-A and B to the petition as depicted in the prayer column. However what is necessary to be noticed is that the challenge in effect is to the order dated 18.06.2011 which in fact is the document at Annexure-A to the petitions. Hence the consideration of the petitions is made in that light. 2. The grievance put forth on behalf of the petitioners is that they are the hereditary archaks of the second and third respondent temple, but their right to perform the Chandi Homa in the manner as it existed earlier is being taken away by the order dated 16.03.2009. Learned counsel for the pet...
Tag this Judgment!C. Venugopal and Another Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on: Mar-11-2016
K.N. Phaneendra, J. 1. The petitioners are arrayed as Accused Nos. 1 and 2 in CC No. 319/2013 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raichur, for the offence punishable under section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948. 2. The brief factual matrix of the case is that - On 26.7.2013 -at about 12.00 p.m., a person by name Sri Thammaiah, Executive Engineer (Safety), Raichur Thermal Power Station, Shakthinagar, Raichur, informed the complainant i.e., Assistant Director of Factories, Raichur Division, Raichur, about the electrical fatal accident which took place at outdoor yard, Lingsugur Line-Ill inside the premises of the factory. The complainant's office received notice on dangerous occurrence of cause of death of - one Anantha S/o. Vivekananda, while performing annual overhauling/break down maintenance work of 220/400 KV switch Yard equipments, such as SF6 circuit breakers, isolators, CTs, CVTs., PTs., Las., DG sets and LT Switch Gear. The deceased by name Anantha son of Vivekananda, Y...
Tag this Judgment!Nandini Dinesh Shingte Vs. M/s. NGEF Ltd.,
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-2016
(Prayer: This Company Application is filed under Section 446(2) of the Companies Act, 1956, read with Rule 6 and 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, praying this Hon ble Court to direct the Respondent to make payment of Rs. 16,22,036/- towards arrears of rent to the applicant, from 01.01.2004 to till the date of filing of this application, and etc.) 1. Heard Sri. Vishwanath H.M., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. G.C. Yadhav, learned Official Liquidator, who has addressed the arguments on this application with the leave of this court. Perused the records. 2. The applicant, who is the absolute owner of the immovable property situated at Shiye Phata, Old National Highway No.4, Tuluqa, Hatkanangale, Kolhapur District had undisputedly leased said property in favour of the Company (in liquidation) by executing lease deed dated 30.07.1983 which was with effect from 01.08.1983, whereunder it was agreed that rate of rent was Rs.2,500/- p.m. as per Annexure-A. From time ...
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka State Financial Corporation, Rep. by its Authorised Officer ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-2016
(Prayer: This M.F.A. is filed under Section 32(9) of the State Financial Corporation Act, against the Order dated 25.01.2010 passed in Misc. Petition No.28/2001 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Mysore, dismissing the petition filed under Section 31 (1) (aa) and Section 32 of the State Financial Corporation Act, for seeking Direction for Enforcement of the Liability.) 1. This Appeal is preferred by the Karnataka State Financial Corporation ('the Corporation' for short) impugning the order dated 25.1.2010 in Miscellaneous Petition No.28/2001 passed by the I Additional District Judge at Mysore, whereby the petition filed by the Corporation under Sections 31(1)(aa) and 32 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 ('the Act' for short) came to be dismissed. 2. Briefly stated, the Corporation filed a petition before the court below under Sections 31(1)(aa) and 32 of the Act against the respondents seeking direction for enforcement of the liability of respondent Nos.2 and 3...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-Tax and Another Vs. Microlabs Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-2016
Jayant Patel J. 1. The appellant has preferred the present appeal by raising two main substantial questions of law, which are as under : "(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in setting aside the computation made by the assessing authority in respect of claim for deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 even when the assessing authority rightly adopted the net expenditure for allowing the weighted deduction and same was done on the basis of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research guidelines wherein it was stated that the receipts to the in-house research and development centre needs to be reduced from gross expenditure and in accordance with parameters of the provision ? (ii) Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was corrected in law in deleting the addition made under section 14A computed under rule 8D(2)(ii) amounting to Rs. 49,42,473 even when the assessing authorit...
Tag this Judgment!Virendra N. Doshi and Another Vs. Aphelion Services Ltd.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-2016
L. Narayana Swamy, J. 1. These criminal revision petitions are filed by the petitioners accused in CC Nos. 27657/2011 and 25140/2012 on the File of the XVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore being aggrieved of the concurrent judgment of conviction and sentence passed against them. The judgments and sentences dated 5.2.2014. passed in the above criminal cases are confirmed by the Fast Track Sessions Judge III at Mayohall, Bangalore by judgments dated 23.12.2014. in Criminal Appeal Nos. 25042-25043/2014. The petitioners are directed to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and pay fine of Rs. 3 lakhs and Rs. 11 lakhs each respectively in both the cases. 2. The facts of the case are that the complainant company at the instance of the petitioners had lent a sum of Rs. 20 lakhs by way of two cheque Nos. 864014 and 261177 dated 5.6.2010. and 30.9.2010. for Rs. 10 lakhs each. In turn the petitioners have executed on demand promissory notes agreeing to return the said amou...
Tag this Judgment!Smt Nandini Dinesh Shingte Vs. M/S N G E F Ltd (In Liqn)
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-11-2016
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE11H DAY OF MARCH, 2016 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR COMPANY APPLICATION No.1115/2015 BETWEEN: SMT. NANDINI DINESH SHINGTE, W/O SRI.DINESH RAJARAM SHINGTE, AGED ABOUT56YRS., R/O. FLAT NO.201, SHIVNERI PLAZA, E WARD, SHIVAJI PARK, KOLHAPUR 416 001. REP. BY HER GPA HOLDER, SRI.DINESH RAJARAM SHINGTE, S/O LATE DR.RAJARAM DHONDIBA SHINGTE, AGED ABOUT60YRS., R/O FLAT NO.201, SHIVNERI PLAZA, E WARD, SHIVAJI PARK, KOLHAPUR 416 001. (BY SRI.VISHWANATH.H.M., ADV. ) AND: M/S. N G E F LTD., (IN LIQN), REP. HEREIN BY THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, ATTACHED TO HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CORPORATE BHAVAN, 12TH FLOOR, APPLICANT2RAHEJA TOWERS, NO.26-27, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001. (BY SRI.G.C.YADAV, LEARNED OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR A/W SRI.K.S.MAHADEVAN AND V.JAYARAM FOR OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR.) THIS COMPANY APPLICATION IS FILED UNDER SECTION4462) OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, READ WITH RULE6AND9OF THE COMPANIES (COURT) RULES, 1959, PRAYI...
Tag this Judgment!The State by Jayalakshmipuram Police Station Vs. N. Shivabasavanna @ B ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-2016
(Prayer: CRL.P filed U/S.439(2) CR.P.C by the S.P.P for the state praying that this Hon'ble COURT may be pleased to set aside the order dated 10.08.2015 passed by the VI Addl. Dist. and Spl. J., Mysuru in S.C.NO.78/2015 and cancel the bail granted to the Respondent-Accused for the offence P/U/S 366,343,376,506 of IPC and under Sec.4,6 of Pocs Act, by allowing this petition and direct that the Respondent-Accused be arrested and committed to Custody.) 1. The present petition is filed by the State requesting this court to cancel the bail granted by the VI Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Mysuru, in S.C.78/15. 2. The learned judge has enlarged the respondent herein who is the sole accused in a criminal case in Crime NO.89/14, a case registered by the respondent police. After concluding investigation, charge sheet is filed for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 343, 376, 506, I.P.C. and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, (here...
Tag this Judgment!K.M. Chikkathayamma and Others Vs. The State of Karnataka, Urban Devel ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-2016
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to declare that the land acquisition proceedings initiated against the schedule lands belonging to the petitioners have been lapsed by virtue of the coming into force of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. These Writ Petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the award dated 30.4.2010 in respect of Sy.No.70/7 measuring 14 guntas of Bomanahalli Village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk is concerned vide Annexure-D and etc; This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to declare that the preliminary notification dated 7.11.2002 [Annexure-H] issued under Section 17[1] of the BDA Act and the final notification dated 9.9.2003 [Annexure-J] issued in so far as the schedule property is concerned under Section 19[1] of the BDA Ac...
Tag this Judgment!Prema Vs. S. Prasanna
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-10-2016
H. Billappa, J. 1. I.A.1/15 has been filed by the appellant praying to grant leave to file the appeal. I.A.2/15 has been filed by the appellant praying to condone the delay of 311 days in filing the appeal. 2. It is. stated, the appellant had filed private complaint in PCR No. 25512/2013 on the file of the XXII Addl. CMM, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under section 138 of the N.I. Act. The complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution on 24.11.2014. It was challenged in Criminal .P.No. 8146/2014. The said petition was disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred criminal revision petition before the Sessions Court. It was withdrawn with liberty to file the appeal. Thereafter, the present appeal has been filed. Therefore, there is delay of 311 days in filing the appeal. It may be condoned and leave may be granted to file the appeal. 3. The learned counsel for the respondent opposes the applications contending th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »