Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1994KAR2947; 1995(1)KarLJ67
..... decision relied on by the learned single judge in g. narayanaswamyreddy's case supra to the case on hand. according to section 11-a of the land acquisition (amendment) act, 1984, the period during which any action or proceeding to be taken in pursuance of the declaration is stayed by an order of a court shall be excluded. ..... further, in view of the first proviso to section 11-a that where a declaration under section 4 of the land acquisition act has been published before the commencement of the said amendment act, the award must be made within a period of two years from such commencement, the supreme court there held that non-disclosure of ..... denotifying the land acquired already under sections 4(1) and 6(1) notifications. therefore, the appellant society had to file an application (i.a.no. iii) for amendment of the prayer by substituting additional prayer. it had also filed i.a.no. vi for interim direction not to proceed with the denotification, pending disposal of the writ .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1986KAR1162
..... of 1983,angol area has been brought within the limits of belgaum corporation to which the provisions of the rent control act apply.11. sri. javali referred me to sub section (2) of section 1 of the karnataka rent control (amendment) act, 17 of 1983. it reads as :'it shall be deemed to have come into force on the thirty first ..... therefore, in order to make the pending proceedings legal it was stated by the legislature that the amendment act came into force on 31-124982, therefore, the mention that the act shall be deemed to have come into force on 31-12-1982 will not make the act effective only from 31-12-1982.13. section 4 of the karnataka rent control ..... (amendment) act, (17 of 1983) reads:'substitution of schedules i, ii and iii:- for schedules i, ii and iii of the principal act, the following schedules shall be substituted, namely :-'schedule i[see section .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1992KAR3049; 1992(4)KarLJ360
..... muzrai officer or the endowment commissioner.23. indeed, the act of 1927 came to be amended by the mysore religious and charitable institutions (karnataka amendment) act,1979 (karnataka act no. 18 of 1980) with effect from 27-5-1930 bywhich section 21 came to be amended. by virtue of the saidamendment, the commissioner for endowments ..... and muzrai officershall be made defendants in a suit in place of muzrai officer. theobject of the amendment was that a ..... etc., stood in the name of the deity sri lakshminarasimhaswamy resulting in the land being governed by the karnataka (religious and charitable) inams abolition act, 1955 (the act for short).7. it is stated that ramaiah, respondent-3 herein, moved the special deputy commissioner for inams abolition, respondent-6 herein, with an .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1998(5)KarLJ685
..... made before the expiry of a period of six months from the date of the commencement of section 1 of the karnataka land reforms (amendment) act, 1978. (2) on receipt of the application, the tribunal shall publish or cause to be published a public notice in the village in which the land is situated ..... immediately prior to 1-3-1974 being the date of commencement of the karnataka land reforms (amendment) act, 1973 and prima facie, it is found by the authorities that under the act the land had vested in the government pursuant to section 44 of the act and becomes liable to be disposed of in terms of mandate under section 45(3) read ..... manner of publishing the notices and all other matters connected therewith shall be such as may be prescribed. the tribunal may for valid and sufficient reasons permit the tenant to amend the application. (4) where no objection is filed, the tribunal may, after such verification as it considers necessary, by order, either grant or reject the application. (5) where .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1991KAR1899; 1991(2)KarLJ116
..... a similar question was considered by this court. the relevant portion of the judgment reads:'14. as stated earlier, section 18 of the central act was amended by the amending act of the 1961 enacted by this state. the legislature of this state considered that in addition to the time within which an application seeking reference should ..... corruption, should not be given. we have come across several references made after two decades, particularly after several additional benefits were conferred by amending act 68 of 1984 amending the land acquisition act. in our opinion, the correct view to take is, just as the party loses the right to the reference if no application is ..... we answer the question set out first as follows:a reference made by a land acquisition officer under section 18 of the land acquisition act, as amended by karnataka land acquisition (amendment) act 1961 after the right of the claimant to make an application before the civil judge praying for a direction to call for reference .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2003KAR1923; 2002(6)KarLJ473
..... revision authority, dharwar. in l.r.r.a. no. 12 of 1987 and to consider the same as writ petition, under section 17 of the karnataka land reforms amendment act no. 18 of 1990. 2. at the outset, learned counsel for contesting respondent has raised the question of maintainability of the civil petition and the writ petition. since ..... tribunal as well as that of the appellateauthority before this court in a separate writ petition. no civilpetition can lie on such an order under section 17 of the act. if thepetitioners were otherwise aggrieved, they could have preferred arevision petition. that course is also not taken. therefore, the civilpetition is not maintainable and that has got ..... of the district land reforms appellate authority in l.r.r.a. no. 12 of 1987 and to consider the same as writ petition under the provisions of the act. it is this action of the petitioner which is challenged as not maintainable by the respondent. 4. relying upon the pronouncement of this court in the case of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [2006]146STC513(Kar)
..... a statute is made a nullity through the decision of a court of law.on the basis of the aforesaid decisions, i am of the view that the amended act is constitutionally valid and does not violate articles 14 and 19(l)(g) of the constitution of india in any manner as contended by the learned senior counsel ..... collected by way of tax or purporting a to be by way of tax in contravention of section 18 at any time before the commencement of the karnataka sales tax (amendment) act, 1992, the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) shall apply to such amount collected.it is crystal clear from clause (ii) of sub-section (2) of ..... said provision and the judicial pronouncements. on the basis of expressions used, he submitted that, the expressions used in the central act no. 10 of 2000 may be compared with the expressions used in other amended acts where the amendments were introduced with retrospective effect. on the basis of judicial pronouncements, he submitted that it has been held by courts that, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [2006]148STC17(Kar)
..... sold in consumer sachets, bottles or tins of 200 grams or 200 milliliters each or less, including when such consumer containers are sold in bulk in a common container', by amendment act no. 26 of 2004. in between, by notification no. fd 173 csl 2002 (1), dated august 19, 2002, the levy of tax under entry no. 17- ..... been extracted and placed before the court which is quoted as under :to provide for levy of tax at higher rate on coconut oil used for toilet purposes (amendment of second schedule):use of coconut oil as edible oil has come down considerably owing to availability of more economically priced alternate edible oils and also for change ..... classification is not a reasonable classification; that the state has not justified the levy of higher rate of tax on sale of branded coconut oil alone and therefore the act no. 5 of 2001 should be inevitably declared as unconstitutional.25. sri vedamurthy, learned government pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents, has sought to defend stoutly .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR2003Kant104
..... that the preliminary decree was already passed and therefore no right accrued in favour of the 6th defendant under section 6a of the hindu succession act (karnataka amendment) act, 1990 is perfectly legal and valid and it cannot be interfered with by this court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. in view of ..... . the correctness of the impugned order is questioned in this revision petition by the 6th defendant placing reliance upon the provisions of section 6a of the hindu succession act (karnataka amendment) act. 1990 and the decision of the supreme court ; ; ; ; ; and also the decision of the supreme court in support of the proposition that nothing ..... his consideration as to whether defendant no. 6 is entitled for enhanced share in the joint family properties in view of the hindu succession (karnataka amendment) act of 1990. the learned counsel appearing for the parties addressed arguments making their respective submissions on the aforesaid points. the trial court after referring to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1999(1)KarLJ539
..... and corruption, should not be given. we have come across several references made after two decades, particularly after several additional benefits were conferred by amending act 68 of 1984 amending the land acquisition act. in our opinion, the correct view to make is, just as the party loses the right to the reference if no application is made within ..... the civil court on the application filed by the claimant within a specified time. in the absence of any provisions contained in section 18 of the act, as amended by the [karnataka act no. 68 of 1984], limiting the power of the deputy commissioner to make a reference after a particular period, there cannot be any scope for ..... ninety days from the date of the reference application. the learnedcounsel pointed out that the object of sub-section (3)(a) of section 18 of the act, as amended by [karnataka act no. 68 of 1984], wherein it is provided that the deputy commissioner should make a reference to the court within ninety days from the date of .....
Tag this Judgment!