Court : Karnataka
..... in the area of a distribution licensee; (f) adjudicate upon the disputes between the licensees, and generating companies and to refer any dispute for arbitration; (g) levy fee for the purposes of this act; (h) specify state grid code consistent with the grid code specified under clause (h) of sub-section (1) of section 79; (i) specify or enforce standards with respect to quality, continuity and reliability of ..... other sources through agreements for purchase of power for distribution and supply within the state; (c) facilitate intra-state transmission and wheeling of electricity; (d) issue licences to persons seeking to act as transmission licensees, distribution licensees and electricity traders with respect to their operations within the state; 80 (e) promote co-generation and generation of electricity from renewable sources of energy by ..... of the commission cannot be taken away on the plea of the petitioners that parties cannot confer jurisdiction; parties have not conferred jurisdiction, the jurisdiction is conferred by the act and the ppa between the parties.38. in the result, i pass the following: order (a) all the writ petitions are allowed, the impugned orders passed by the commission in all ..... 62 of the act, the appropriate commission is to ..... 2005 issued by the central government under section 63 make it clear that such guidelines are framed with the following objectives in mind: these guidelines have been framed under the above provisions of section 63 of the act .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... in the area of a distribution licensee; (f) adjudicate upon the disputes between the licensees, and generating companies and to refer any dispute for arbitration; (g) levy fee for the purposes of this act; (h) specify state grid code consistent with the grid code specified under clause (h) of sub-section (1) of section 79; (i) specify or enforce standards with respect to quality, continuity and reliability of ..... other sources through agreements for purchase of power for distribution and supply within the state; (c) facilitate intra-state transmission and wheeling of electricity; (d) issue licences to persons seeking to act as transmission licensees, distribution licensees and electricity traders with respect to their operations within the state; 80 (e) promote co-generation and generation of electricity from renewable sources of energy by ..... of the commission cannot be taken away on the plea of the petitioners that parties cannot confer jurisdiction; parties have not conferred jurisdiction, the jurisdiction is conferred by the act and the ppa between the parties.38. in the result, i pass the following: order (a) all the writ petitions are allowed, the impugned orders passed by the commission in all ..... 62 of the act, the appropriate commission is to ..... 2005 issued by the central government under section 63 make it clear that such guidelines are framed with the following objectives in mind: these guidelines have been framed under the above provisions of section 63 of the act .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... high court of madras (madurai bench) in m.mohan vs- the sub registrar, kuzhithural, reported in manu/tn/6382/2019, wherein with respect to undervaluation of the property and initiation of action under section 82 of the registration act, the madras high court relying upon mt.gobindia and others's case (supra), has observed in para-8 of its order that, the sub registrar had no jurisdiction to enquire as regards truth or falsity of any recital in ..... , it was for him to establish the same through an appropriate legal action, in which direction, he has already instituted a civil suit against the present petitioner in o.s.no.4528/2005 before the city civil court, at crl.r.p.no.453/2013 23 bengaluru ..... /2013 2 order the present petitioner was tried as accused by the court of learned ix addl.chief metropolitan magistrate, bengaluru, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the `trial court') in c.c.no.28802/2005, for the offence punishable under section 82 of the registration act, 1908, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the `registration act') and was convicted by its judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 19.10.2012 and was sentenced accordingly. ..... the trial court by its impugned judgment dated 19.10.2012, convicted the accused for the offence punishable under section 82 of the registration act and sentenced her to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of `5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [2008(118)FLR669]; ILR2008KAR1597; 2008(4)KarLJ26; (2009)ILLJ568Kant; 2008(6)KLJ451; 2008(1)KCCRSN51; 2008(2)AIRKarR481; 2008LabIC(NOC)560(Kar); 2008-III-LLJ-433
..... of article 137 of the schedule appended to the limitation act, 1963 are applicable or not although the court cannot import a period of limitation when the statute does not prescribe the same, as was observed in ajaib singh's case reported in 1999 scc (l & s) 1054, but it does not mean that irrespective of the facts and circumstances of each case, a stale claim must be entertained by the appropriate government while making a reference or in a case where ..... is raised, it has to be raised within reasonable time, not after inordinate delay, as otherwise, entertaining of such belated disputes without any justification would be fatal to the management or the corporation to defend and lead relevant evidence by taking appropriate defence in the matter. ..... trite that the courts and tribunals having plenary jurisdiction have discretionary power to grant on appropriate relief to the parties. ..... of the employer become relevant, the long delay would come in the way of maintenance of the same, to such circumstances to make them available to a labour court or the industrial tribunal to adjudicate the dispute appropriately will be impossible. ..... of that nature would render the claim to have become stale....he relied on another judgment reported in 2005 scc (l & s) 601 in the matter of haryana state coop. ..... 3241/2005 and observed that, delay in raising the dispute is not fetal insofar as reinstatement, but the delay disentitles the workman for monetary benefits like backwages, continuity of service or other .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (2009)24VST510(Karn)
..... matter stands remitted back to the first respondent for reconsideration afresh, with a direction to take appropriate decision, after affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and dispose of the same, in the light of the judgment passed by the division bench of this court dated july ..... in view of non-considering the objections filed by the petitioner and not conducting the proper enquiry in strict compliance with the mandatory provisions of the act and rules, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that, if the first respondent has afforded an opportunity to the petitioner, he might have placed the judgment of the ..... of the orders of reassessment dated june 29, 2006 passed by the first respondent under section 39(1) of the act, for the periods april, 2005 to november 2005, vide annexures d to d7 and also the notices of demand dated july 7, 2006 issued by the second respondent in form 180 in consequence to the orders of reassessment dated june 29, 2006, passed under the provisions of the act vide annexures e to e7, has presented the instant writ petition.2. ..... june 29, 2006 passed by the first respondent under section 39(1) of the act, for the periods april, 2005 to november, 2005 vide annexure d to d7 and also the notices of demand dated july 7, 2006 issued by the second respondent in form 180 in consequence to the orders of reassessment dated june 29, 2006, passed under the provisions of the act vide annexures e to e7 are hereby set aside.7. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2008KAR3370; 2009(2)KarLJ64; 2008(3)KCCR1616; 2008(4)AIRKarR373; AIR2008Kar168; 2008AIHC2985(Kar)
..... before adverting to the correctness or otherwise of the notice dated: 20.1.2005 and 18.2.2005 issued to the petitioner, it would be appropriate to consider the contention with regard to the applicability of the act and the validity of the rules framed there under. ..... as such i am of the view that the opinion expressed in the said case by the division bench of the bombay high court, is the appropriate decision and therefore, i am of the considered view that the provisions of the act would be applicable even without any other specific notification regarding the classes of goods as contended and as such the act would be applicable to the product manufactured by the petitioner as well.7. ..... the action of the second respondent not only on the ground that the notice is not sustainable, since the petitioner had in fact complied with the requirements but also questions the very applicability of the act and also the validity of rule 6(1)(d) under which the requirement for display of month and year is indicated.3. ..... is further contended that even otherwise the rule 6(1)(d) of the rules is invalid since section 39 of the act does not provide for display of the month and year in which the product is manufactured. ..... others it is also stated in the objects that indication of date of manufacture and date of expiry would also be marked for appropriate products. ..... accordingly, compounding notice dated 20.1.2005 was issued intimating registration of case for violation of the provisions of the act and rules. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... the matter is remitted back to the learned magistrate to pass appropriate orders in the light of aforesaid provisions and observations made in this order, after securing the presence of respondent before the trial court. ..... by act no.25/2005, the provision is made to provide an appeal against the order of learned magistrate to the sessions court. ..... was chargesheeted on the allegation that he had employed a child in his shop on the date when inspector visited the shop premises and therefore, learned magistrate prepared a plea for the offence under section 30 of the act and as advocate representing the respondent pleaded guilty, ordered the accused to pay fine of rs.1,000/- for the offence under section 30 of the act and fine of rs.225/- without citing the offence with default sentence. ..... the order of learned magistrate awarding fine of rs.1,000/- for the offence under section 30(3) of the act and further fine of rs.225/- without specifying offence is erroneous and illegal. ..... in default, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months and further convicted him to sentenced to pay fine of rs.225 of said act in default, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for one month.) 1. ..... as could be seen from the provisions to section 30(3) of the act, it reads thus: "30(3) whoever contravenes the provisions of [sections 24 and 25], shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three months but which may extend to six months or with fine which .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... the land tribunal rejected the application, following which respondents 2 and 3 claiming to be the legal representatives of deceased k.lingaiah jointly filed an appeal under section 118(1a) of the karnataka land reforms act, 1961 before the appellate authority, whence, an application for adducing additional evidence on the premise that the tribunal had not extended sufficient opportunity was allowed and permitted to adduce additional evidence. ..... allowed by order dated 24.04.1992 of the learned single judge declaring as ultra vires the entire amendment act, 1979, while the civil appeal nos.10229-30/1996 arising out of slp nos.3246-47/1993 instituted by the state before the apex court were dismissed by order dated 08.08.1996 without expressing any opinion on the validity of amendment act 26 of 1979, observing that the question as to the validity of amendment act was left open to be considered in an appropriate case. 10. ..... however, in m b ramachandran vs gowramma and others (air 2005 sc 2671), the apex court observed thus: "....we hold that the judgment of the high court in sri.kudil sringeri maha samsthanam in so far as it declared the karnataka inams abolition (amendment) act, 1979 (act 26 of 1979) void in its entirety is not correct. ..... 28.04.2005, the land tribunal is the authority to decide claim of occupancy rights and orders passed by the deputy commissioner on or after 24.04.1992 upto 28.04.2005 are valid as one with jurisdiction. 12. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... this was followed by notice dated 06.05.2005 to the second respondent, in response to which, a letter dated 27.01.2006 annexure f was addressed by the tax recovery officer informing the petitioner to proceed with the sale of the immovable properties as it had the first charge and to treat the income-tax department as a second mortgagee and after appropriation of the sale proceeds, the remainder if any, to hand over the same for appropriation towards income-tax dues. 5. ..... charge created under state legislations, then it would have incorporated provisions similar to those contained in section 14-a of the workmens compensation act, 1923, section 11(2) of the epf act, section 74(1) of the estate duty act, 1953, section 25 (2) of the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1957, section 30 of the gift tax act and section 529-a of the companies act, 1956 and ensure that notwithstanding series of judicial pronouncements, dues of banks, financial institutions and other secured creditors ..... was held that it was not possible to read any conflict or inconsistency or overlapping between the provisions of the drt act and the securitisation act, on the one hand, and section 38-c of the bombay act and section 26-b of the kerala act, on the other, and the non obstante clauses contained in section 34(1) of the drt act and section 35 of the securitisation act cannot be invoked for declaring that the first charge created under the state legislation would not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... the present review petitioner who is the petitioner in cmp no.15/2012 which was filed before this court under section 11(5) and (6) of the arbitration and conciliation act,1996 (for short hereinafter referred to as `the act) for appointment of sole arbitrator or any other appropriate tribunal comprising of sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes that have arisen between the petitioner and respondent under the agreements dated 29.09.2006 vide annexures a and b therein. ..... that the chief justice does not represent the high court or supreme court as the case may be is also clear from section 11(10):"the chief justice may make such scheme as he may deem appropriate for dealing with matters entrusted by sub- section (4) or sub-section(5) or sub-section (6) to him. ..... therefore, the provisions of 2001 rules is applicable and he specifically invited the attention of the court to rule 12 of the rules stating that subject to what is provided for in the arbitration conciliation act, these rules, the provisions of cpc and karnataka civil rules of practice may be applied to the proceedings under the act to the extent considered necessary or appropriate by the court or judicial authority.13. ..... patel engineering reported in (2005) 8 scc618(relevant paragraph44) and contended that in the said judgment the supreme court has held that on an order passed by the chief justice of india, the party will not have any further remedy in respect of .....
Tag this Judgment!