Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1961Mys198; 1961CriLJ509
ORDER1. This revision petition arises from a case in which the petitioners are being prosecuted for offences under Sections 163 and 420, I. P. C. The case is being tried by a Special. Judge under Section 6 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1952; under Section 8 cf that Act, the procedure prescribed being that for the trial of warrant cases under the Code of Criminal Procedure. The stage reached in the, case is that charges have been framed against the accused and the prosecution is examining its witnesses.The accused have not yet entered on their defence. The petitioners (Accused) applied to the Court to summon a witness for the production of certain documents. The learned Judge rejected the application taking the view that the accused were not entitled to make the application until they had entered on their defence.2. According to the learned Judge Section 251-A, which now regulates the procedure for warrant cases, accords the accused such a right only when that stage is reached an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1967Kant203; AIR1967Mys203; (1967)2MysLJ256
Chandrashekhar, J. 1. Bellary Central Co-operative Stores Ltd., Bellary (hereinafter referred to as the 'Society'), is a Co-operative Society with limited liability of its shareholders. The Society has been doing extensive business in consumer goods in Bellary District, in the year 1955, the Society started a Sugar Factory at Kampli near Hos-pet. The State Government has given to the Society aid of more than Rupees three lakhs in the form of share-capital, loans, and guarantee for loans taken by the Society for its activities in consumer goods The Government has also subscribed Rs. 16 lakhs towards the share capital for the said Sugar Factory.2. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sections 54 and 121 of the Mysore Co operative Societies Act. 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Co-operative Act'), the Government Issued a Notification (marked document A) on 14-6-1966. By this Notification Section 29 of the Co-operative Act has been modified in relation to this Society so as to enabl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1994KAR3152; 1995(1)KarLJ497
ORDERMohan Kumar, J. 1. These four Revision Petitions raise a common question and hence were heard together and are being disposed of by a Common Order. The petitioners herein were appointed as probationary teachers under the 1st respondent. The period of probation as per the appointment orders is two years. The date of appointment are as follows:i) Petitioner in CRP No. 2550/94 16-5-1992 (She commenced to work from 1-6-1992) ii) Petitioner in CRP No. 2551/94 1-8-1992 iii) Petitioner in CRP No. 2552/94 25-6-1992 (It is her case that she commenced to work from 1-6-1991) iv) Petitioner in CRP No. 2553/94 25-6-1992 (In her case the appointment order is dated 1-6-1992) By order dated 28-3-1994, i.e., before the completion of two years, their services were terminated with effect from 31-3-1994. This termination has been challenged by the petitioners by filing appeals before the Educational Appellate Tribunal. The appeals were presented on 7-4-1994 and the Tribunal passed an interim order in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2010ACJ405; ILR2009KAR501:2009(1)KCCR840:2009(2)AIRKarR266
Subhash B. Adi, J.1. This matter was heard earlier and both the counsel had relied on the decision of the Division Bench and submitted that, there is a conflicting view in the matter of application of provisions of Section 163-A as regard to the income of the deceased.2. However, today learned Counsel for the appellant placed a reliance on the Full Bench decision of this Court reported in ILR 2001 Kar 2879 in the case of (sic) and Anr. v. General Manager, KSRTC and Anr. wherein this Court has held that, in cause the person with the higher income, if he notionally brings down his income to Rs. 40,000/- in order to present his claim under Section 163-A of the Act, such claim is maintainable.3. In the above decision it is also held that the claimant during pendency of the proceedings at the original or appeal stage can amend his claim petition from one made under Section 166 to a petition under Section 163-A provided he satisfies other conditions ouch as income factor etc. In view of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 25.08.2003 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Income Tax Appeal No. 1659/Bang/2002, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure-A to the memorandum of appeal.2. The substantial questions indicated in the memorandum of appeal for examination of which the appeal has been admitted are as under:9. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee is entitled to registration in accordance with Section 12A of the Act as it is carrying on activity of charitable purpose in terms of Section 2(15) of the Act without examining the various materials relied on toy the Director (Exemption) who had arrived at a categorical conclusion that a business activity was carried on by the Trustees for their family benefit and consequently recorded a perverse finding.10. Whether the Tribunal was correct in proceeding to allow the appeal filed by the assess...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1964]52ITR789(KAR); [1964]52ITR789(Karn)
K.S. Hegde, J.1. At the instance of Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore, Bangalore, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, in I.T.A. No. 5488 of 1958-59 on its file, referred to this court the question 'whether the sum of Rs. 1,87,630 is, by is nature, taxable sum under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922?' under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (to be referred to hereinafter as the 'Act'). 2. It would be appropriate to recast this question as follow : 'Whether on the facts and circumstances of this case the sum of Rs. 1,87,630 refunded by the Government to the assessee by adjustment is, by its nature, a taxable sum under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922?' 3. The relevant facts as found by the Tribunal and set out in the statement of the case and the fuller statement of the case submitted to this court are as follow : The assessee was an excise contractor. He had liquor shops at Mahabubnagar, Macherala, Raichur and Narayanpettah. The kist due from him for Faslis ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1985LC71(Karnataka); 1986(25)ELT27(Kar); 1985(1)KarLJ158
Rajasekhara Murthy, J. 1. This Appeal by the Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate, Foreign Exchange Regulating Act, Government of India, Bangalore, arises under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and is directed against the order dated 31.3.1981 passed by the Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board, New Delhi allowing the appeal of the respondent in part, which was filed against the order dated 28.3.1977 passed by the Special Director of Enforcement, Madras, in Proceedings No. SDE(47)/Vii- 15/77. 2. The facts relevant for the disposal of this Appeal are : Respondent - Fr. J. M. Stevens, came to India in the year 1948. He holds a Belgian Passport and after completing his religious studies in India, he became a priest of the Jesuit Society, Ranchi in the year 1958. He later qualified himself as an architect in the year 1959 from Sri J.J. College of Architecture, Bombay. After becoming an architect, the respondent undertook a numbe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1979]117ITR804(KAR); [1979]117ITR804(Karn)
Venkataramaiah, J.1. Because all the above cases arise out of a common agreement and the questions of law which arise for consideration in them are interconnected, we are disposing of all of them by this common order. 2. M/s. International Instruments Private Ltd., Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'the IIP'), is a company engaged in the manufacture of dashboard instruments used in automobiles and tachometers at Bangalore, India. M/s. VDO Tachometer Werke Adolf Shingling Gmbh. (hereinafter referred to as 'the VDO') is a joint stock company incorporated at Frankfurt, Germany. M/s. Instek Zurich (hereinafter referred to as 'the Instek'), is a company registered in Switzerland. An agreement was entered into on September 30, 1959, in Germany between IIP represented by its managing director, Sri N. Krishnan, and VDO providing for a collaboration for the purpose of manufacturing dashboard instruments and tachometers at the factory of IIP in Bangalore in accordance with the licence grante...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1959Kant177; AIR1959Mys177; 1959CriLJ878; ILR1958KAR661; (1958)36MysLJ892
ORDER1. This is a revision petition filed by the Petitioner against the order dated 9-4-1958 passed by the District Magistrate, Belgawn, in Criminal Revision Application No. D.C./MGA--4329, setting aside the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Belgaum City dated 30-10-1957 in Criminal Mis. Case No. 4 of 1956. In order to appreciate the arguments advanced, it is necessary to mention the facts of the case which may be briefly stated as follows:2. The houses of the parties are adjacent to each other. It is stated that there are four windows on the second floor and two windows on the third floor of the petitioner's house. The house of the respondents, which is adjacent to the western wall of the petitioner's house, has a low roof and the windows of the petitioner's house are above its level. The petitioner made an application to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Belgaum City under Section 147 Cr. P. C. complaining that the Respondents wrongfully and unauthorized obstructed the use ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : II(2006)DMC844; ILR2006KAR3097
R. Gururajan, J. 1. Sri. Victor Sebastian is before us aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 11.8.2005 passed in MC No. 24/2002 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Udupi in this appeal.2. The appellant-husband married respondent on 8.5.1996 at U.B.M. Jublee Church, Udupi as per the customary rights of Protestant Christians. Parties are related to each other. The respondent is a daughter of appellant's mother's younger sister. Parties were knowing each other from their childhood and at the time of marriage, the appellant was working at Dubai. After marriage, at the respondent's instance, the newly married couple had rented a house and they were staying together at Udupi. After four months of the marriage, the respondent had vacated the rented house and gone to her parents house, taking away an advance deposit amount paid by the appellant to the landlord in the. matter. She did not join her husband. The respondent in the light of the amendment to the Indian Divorce Act 2001 fil...
Tag this Judgment!