Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: explosives act 1884 section 4 definitions Sorted by: old Court: karnataka Year: 1989 Page 11 of about 105 results (0.083 seconds)

Nov 30 1989 (HC)

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mallikarjun and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Nov-30-1989

Reported in : I(1991)ACC414

..... between an insured and an insurer against liability by the latter. if such a contract is in respect of a motor vehicle, sub-section (5) and sub-section (1)(b) of section 95 of the act provide that it must cover any liability which may be incurred by him with respect to death or bodily injury to a third party. ..... policy also gets transferred. therefore, philosophy or the doctrine developed in skandia insurance company's case, which bars an insurance policy from containing terms contrary to section 96(2) of the act has no application to the controversy arising in this case.13. in this context it is necessary to refer to one other aspect of the matter, ..... same without obtaining fresh insurance policy to protect third party interests and the vendee further did not lodge before the registering authority any information as required under section 31 of the act for the purposes of transfer of registration of the vehicle in his name. in the present case, there is no dispute that the ownership of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 01 1989 (HC)

Deepak Insulated Cable Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-01-1989

Reported in : (1990)82CTR(Kar)260; [1991]187ITR436(KAR); [1991]187ITR436(Karn); 1990(3)KarLJ42

..... above. the bombay high court, while analyzing the provisions, took the view that, with reference to the definition of chargeable profits in section 2(5) of the act and section 2(8) of the act which refers to statutory deductions and stated that when a part of the amount standing to the credit of a general reserve is, during ..... been taken by the calcutta high court in alkali and chemical corporation of india ltd., v. cit : [1980]122itr490(cal) and followed by the same high court in indian explosives ltd., v. cit : [1985]153itr340(cal) . there, their lordships, after noticing the controversy, stated that the problem involved in the interpretation of rule 3 is only arithmetical ..... the number of days of the previous year during which the increase or the reduction remained effective bears to the total number of days in that previous year.' 5. this section has been very clearly analysed by the bombay high court in cit v. centruy spinning and ., : [1978]111itr6(bom) . it is to the following effect. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 12 1989 (HC)

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Abdul Majeed

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-12-1989

Reported in : II(1990)ACC455; 1991ACJ453; ILR1990KAR1493

..... of adjudicating upon claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving amongst others, 'damages to any property' of a third party. in the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 110 of the act, the words used are: 'a claim for compensation in respect of damage to property'. we are of the opinion that the word 'damages' or ..... was highly excessive.9. sri chinnappa, the learned counsel for the respondents, per contra, submitted as follows: the expression 'damages to property' used in section 110 of the act includes not only the actual damage caused to the property, but also loss of income directly arising out of the damage to the property. elaborating his submission ..... tribunal for adjudicating claims for compensation on account of death, bodily injury or damage to property arising from accidents. so far as, a reference to section 110-f of the act barring the jurisdiction of the civil court is concerned, we find that it bars the civil court to entertain any question relating to 'any claim .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 13 1989 (HC)

Mysodet (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-13-1989

Reported in : (1990)82CTR(Kar)247; [1990]182ITR235(KAR); [1990]182ITR235(Karn); 1990(3)KarLJ31; [1990]51TAXMAN175(Kar)

..... loan to a shareholder or a payment on his behalf is assessable as dividend thereof so as to be treated as a distributed dividend for the purpose of section 104 of the act. 7. the calcutta high court in moore avenue properties (p.) ltd. v. cit : [1966]59itr466(cal) , on the basis that fictions have to be treated ..... tax on a total income of rs. 6,27,430. the assessee not having distributed any dividends to its shareholders, the income-tax officer initiated proceedings under section 104 of the act and, on that basis, levied an additional income-tax at 25% of the amount disallowed. the assessee appealed unsuccessfully both to the appellate assistant commissioner and ..... ,800 to be distributed and that is too small an amount compared to the paid-up capital of the assesses company and, as such, the provisions of section 104 of the act are inapplicable. 3. the assessee is a trading company in which the public are not substantially interested. for the assessment year 1975-76, the company was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 1989 (HC)

Kanaka Raj Mehta Vs. K.V. Shivakumar

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Dec-14-1989

Reported in : ILR1990KAR42

..... petition under article 226 on the ground that the additional collector had no jurisdiction. all the assessments made by the additional collectors were validated by an amending act. section 11 of that amendment gave a right to apply for review before the higher authority or court by whose order the assessment made by additional collectors were ..... of either the penal code or the code of criminal procedure. such a position is also clear from the provisions of the contempt of courts act, 1952. section 3 of that act provides that every high court shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, powers and authority in accordance with the same procedure and practice in respect ..... such a decision was not appealable. in the paragraph on which the learned counsel relied, the supreme court has referred to the several provisions of the act including section 20. but the question which arises for consideration in this case did not arise for consideration. in the case of vinaya chandra the high court had .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //