Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1993KAR3153; 1993(4)KarLJ604
..... industrial alcohol, was disapproved in synthetics' ('synthetics' here was a reference to the second synthetics case).with regard to the scope of legislative competence, court said:'unlike mines and minerals, alcohol stands on a different footing, and is dealt with differently, dependent on whether it is potable or not. what is significant is that legislation falling ..... self evident that no attempt was rightly made to contradict it.'thereafter, tulloch's case was referred in this context. an earlier decision rendered in hinqir rampur coal company's case was also referred and the court observed at page 1444:'where a superior legislature evinced an intention to cover the whole field, the enactments of ..... founded on the particular facts of the case, viz.,(i) the identical question was covered by an earlier decision of the supreme court reported in the hingir rampur coal co. ltd.'s case : [1961]2scr537 and,(ii) section 18g of the central act is so extensive that no field was left to the state to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1986KAR1887
M.N. Venkatachaliah, J.1. This Appeal by the Karnataka Bank, the unsuccessful plaintiff, directed against the judgment and decree dated 12-9-1983, passed in O.S. No. 13 of 1981 on the file of the Civil Judge, Srirangapatna, dismissing its suit for recovery of money advanced on the security of a contract vehicle, raises certain interesting questions touching the extent of the Bar of Civil Courts' jurisdiction under the Karnataka Contract Carriages (Acquistion) Act, 1976.2. Plaintiff, Karnataka Bank Ltd., on 1-8-1972, agreed to advance a sum of Rs. 1,08,000/- to S. Narayana Bhatta, the first-defendant, to enable him to purchase a new Ashok Leyland Bus to be used as contract-carriage. First defendant's father was a surety. His legal representatives are defendants 2 to 8. The State Government is defendant-9.Out of the sanctioned loan of Rs. 1,08,000/- Rs. 74,112-33 was released on 1-8-1972 for payment to the supplier of the chassis at Ananthapur. Two sums of Rs. 24,000/- and Rs. 9,887-67 w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1989KAR1081; 1989(1)KarLJ409
ORDERBopanna, J.1. Issues in this election petition were settled on 30-11-1988 and the case was posted for trial on 23-1-1989. Parties had filed their respective lists of documents and witnesses as directed by this Court and the case was taken up for trial on 23-1-1988. On that day Respondent-2 filed an application under Section 151, Order 14 Rule 2, Order 7 Rule 11, Order 6 Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Sections 83 and 87 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (In short the Act). In that application he had made the following prayer:a) that issue numbers 1 and 2 be tried as preliminaryminary issues. A finding thereon in favour of Respondent No. 2 will dispose of Issues 3 to 7, 14 and 16, and obviate recording of voluminous evidence;b) that in view of the fact that the petitioner has not complied with the mandatory requirements of Section 83 of the Act the petition should be dismissed in limine and as that question is a pure question of law which could be decid...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1993KAR116; 1993(1)KarLJ1
N.D.V. Bhat, J. 1. These ten Appeals arise out of ten suits viz., O.S.Nos. 5391/1989, 5373/1989, 2231/1990, 5372/1989, 5390/1989, 5374/1989, 5375/1989, 6678/1989, 5389/1989 and 5371/1989 respectively on the file of the XIII Additional City Civil Court, Bangalore. The said ten suits were filed by different plaintiffs who are the respective respondents before this Court in these ten Appeals. 2. The appellant - B.D.A. was a party defendant in each of the aforesaid ten suits. The lower Court decreed the suit of each of the plaintiffs for permanent injunction by his common judgment delivered in these suits after clubbing them together. Being aggrieved by the judgment, which has gone against the B.D.A. in each of the said suits, the B.D.A. has preferred these ten Appeals. 3. The facts relevant for the disposal of these Appeals, briefly stated, are as under: Each of the plaintiffs in the aforesaid ten suits filed before the City Civil Court prayed for a decree for permanent injunction. The pi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [2000(86)FLR986]; ILR1999KAR3065; 2000(1)KarLJ564
ORDER1. The petitioners-workmen are aggrieved by the common award passed by the second respondent-Additional Labour Court in I.D. Nos. 205 to 212 of 1994, dated 5-11-1997, they have filed these writ petitions before this Court challenging the same urging various legal contentions.2. The workmen raised an industrial dispute by presenting their separate claim petitions under Section 10(4-A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1988 (in short, 'the Act') challenging the action of the management in refusing employment to them during the month of May and June 1992, urging various legal contentions contending that, first respondent-management had appointed them. Prior to the appointment order dated 10-6-1991 copy of the appointment order vide Annexure-C they have worked as Trainee Machine Operators' in the first respondent-management for one year and thereafter they were appointed as Machine Operators in permanent posts on probation for six months. It is also furth...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR2002Kant1; ILR2002KAR2377
..... holding; (b) all rights, title and interest vesting in the inamdar including those in all communal lands, cultivated lands, uncultivated lands, whether assessed or not, waste lands, pasture lands, forests, mines and minerals, quarries, rivers and streams, tanks and irrigation works, fisheries, and ferries shall cease and be vested absolutely in the state government, free from all encumbrances; (c) the inamdar .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1984KAR205
ORDERMahendra, J.1. The petitioners in all these writ petitions have challenged the validity of the acquisition of their lands under the Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the State of Karnataka.2. Petitioners own lands at Bommasandra village in Anekal Taluk. Acquisition proceedings were initiated by the State of Karnataka to acquire their lands and various other persons under the Act by a notification dated 28-2-1981 under Section 28(1) published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 5-3-1981-Ann. 'A'. The petitioners were served with notices to show cause within 30 days from the date of service of notice as to why their lands should not be acquired. Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 25572, 25573 and 25574 of 1981 were served with notice on 28-3-1981 while the petitioner in W. P. No. 25575 of 1981 was served with notice on 26-3-1981. While the petitioner in W.P. No. 25572 of 1981 filed his objections on 11-5-1981, the petitioners in W. P. Nos. 25573 and 255...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (1985)49CTR(Kar)157; ILR1985KAR650; [1986]159ITR477(KAR); [1986]159ITR477(Karn)
Jagannatha Shetty, J. 1. In Writ Petitions Nos. 2535 and 236 of 1975 and Writ Petitions Nos. 13724 to 13727 of 1978, the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and in Writ Petitions Nos. 3353 and 3354 of 1975, the petitioner has challenged the validity of section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. 2. The facts in each case are simple and as follows : (i) W. Ps. Nos. 2535 and 2536 of 1975 : K. S. Muthukali Chettiar is the common petitioner. For the assessment year 1970-71, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, Range-I, Bangalore, on May 1, 1974, passed an order under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, l961, imposing a penalty of Rs. 40,140 on the petitioner for concealing an income of Rs. 40,134.Against the said order, an appeal was filed before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the Tribunal by order dated February 21, 1975, dismissed the appeal. For the assessment year 1971-72, the Income-tax Officer, Ass...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... at the commencement of the appointed date had to be taken into account for determining the profit and loss during the period of management of the mine by the central government. thereafter, the coal mines nationalisation laws (amendment) ordinance and act, 1986 was issued. section 19(2) of the principal act as introduced by the amending act act and section ..... as compensation shall be deemed to include and deemed always to have included in the amount required to be paid to the owner in respect of all the coal in stock on the date immediately before the appointed date. the said amending act act was held to be valid as it altered the basis of the principal ..... shetty v. international airport authority of india [(1979) 3 scc489: air1979sc1628 , harjit singh v. state of punjab [(2007) 9 scc582: (2007) 2 scc (l&s) 997]. ,ashoka smokeless coal india (p) ltd. v. union of india [(2007) 2 scc640 and poonam verma v. dda [(2007) 13 scc154: (2007) 14 scale 485]. .) 25. furthermore, the regulations have been .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... servants but was later extended to women employees also w.e.f. 11/07/1894. the life insurance scheme was extended to general public on 15/7/1895. with the nationalisation of the life insurance business in india, the public branch of the department was bifurcated and merged with the life insurance corporation of india on 01/09/1956 and the .....
Tag this Judgment!