1
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-05-1986
Reported in : 1986LC366(Karnataka); 1986(26)ELT205(Kar)
ORDER1. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has sought for quashing the order dated 28th April, 1986 passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs (ACC), Customs House, Mangalore in No. IMNO. 121 of 1985 produced as Annexure-T. 2. The petitioner has also further prayed for issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the second respondent to release 10 GP defective steel coils to him. 3. The petitioner imported 113 GP defective steel coils. All the coils were scheduled to be unloaded at Mangalore Port, but only 10 coils were unloaded on 17-6-1985 at Mangalore due to labour strike at the Mangalore Port, and the remaining 103 coils were unloaded at Cochin Port. The Assistant Collector of Customs, Mangalore, waited for about 9 months. Even then, the goods were not cleared by the petitioner. Therefore, he issued a show cause notice dated 14-3-1986 produced as Annexure-S to the petitioner to show cause as to why the 10 GP defective steel coi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jan-30-1986
Reported in : AIR1986Kant258; ILR1986KAR743; 1986(1)KarLJ260
Rama Jois, J. 1. This writ appeal is by The Indian Bank against the order of the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 6,889 of 1979 allowing the writ petition and setting aside the order of the Estate Officer made under S. 5 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, ('the Act' for short) and the order of the III Additional District judge and the Appellate Authority under the Act confirming the said order.2(e)4514(1) Whether there was likelihood of bias on the part of the Estate Officer vitiating the order of eviction? and(2) Whether the petitioner was denied of a reasonable opportunity by the Estate OfficerThe answer given by the learned single Judge on both these questions was in the affirmative. Accordingly the writ petition was allowed and the orders of the Estate Officer and of the Appellate Authority were quashed. In view of the answer to the two questions in favour of the first respondent, the learned Judge declined to go into the question of con...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Feb-11-1986
Reported in : ILR1987KAR1369
ORDERK.A. Swami, J. 1. In W.P. 1602 86 the petitioner No. 1 is a Municipal Council and petitioner No. 2 claims to be an Ex-Municipal Councillor. In W.P. 1879/86 the petitioner claims to be a resident of Koppa Town in Chickmagalur Dist. The petitioner in W.P. 2280/86 are citizens of India and they also claim to be rate-payers of Town Municipalities of Krishnarajapet and Bellur in Mandya Dist.2. In W.P. 1602/86 there is an application filed by the petitioners seeking an amendment to the Writ Petition. By the amendment the petitioners want to add a prayer regarding the validity of Section 128 of Karnataka Act No. 20 of 1985 as amended by Karnataka Ordinance No. 19 of 1985 and also for issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents not to implement the notifications issued pursuant thereto.3. As in all these petitions the validity of Section 126 of the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk Panchayats Samithis, Mandal Panchayats & Nyaya Panchayats Act, 1983(Karnataka Act 20 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Feb-21-1986
Reported in : ILR1986KAR3831; [1987]64STC208(Kar)
ORDERM.N. Venkatachaliah, J.1. By these writ petitions under article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners, who are traders and industrial manufacturers, challenge the validity of the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas for Consumption, Use or Sale Therein Act, 1979 ('principal Act'). The principal Act received the assent of the President on 17th May, 1979. It was published in the Gazette on 1st June, 1979. The legislation is a taxing measure referable to entry 52 of List II and envisages an impost of the nature of an entry tax, intended to raise finances substituting the old octroi till then being levied by the various local authorities and the municipal bodies in the State. There was earlier a large batch of writ petitions challenging the principal Act which ultimately went upto the Supreme Court. The legislative history; the nature and incidents of the impost and the constitutional validity of the charging section were considered by the Supreme Court in State of...
Tag this Judgment!