Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2001KAR2524
ORDERThe Court1. Issue rule.These writ petitions are taken up with the consent of parties for final disposal. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Advocate General for the State.2. The petitioners, in these writ petitions, challenge various amendments introduced into the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').3. The easiest way to understand the case would be to extract the unamended sections and the amended sections of the Act side by side. Only the relevant sub-sections are extracted for the sake of brevity.Unamended ActAmended Act by Act No. 25 of 19981.1. Section 17(1)(c)(c)Carries on business of the kind carried on by such Cooperative Society.1. Section 17(1)(c)(c) Carries on(or any of his near relation carries on) business of the kind carried on bysuch Co-operative Society.2.2. Section 29-C(1)(c) (c) He carries ona business of the kind carried on by such Co-operative Society or by aCo-operative Society of which s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2001ACJ1528; AIR2001Kant275; ILR2001KAR2879; 2001(5)KarLJ322
Acts/Rules/Orders:Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 92-A, 92(2), 94, 95(1), 95(2), 96, 96(2), 140, 140(5), 141, 145, 149, 163-A, 163-A(1), 163-A(3), 163-B, 166, 173 and 217;Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1994;Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Section 110 and 110-F;Constitution of India - Articles 14, 39-A and 41;Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 33, Rule 9-A;Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923Cases Referred:Gajraj Singh v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and Others, AIR 1997 SC 412;Ramdev Singh v. Chudasama and Others and Hansrajbhai v. Kodala and Another, 1999 ACJ 1129, (1999) 1 Guj. L.R. 631 (Guj.);Kesavan Nair v. State Insurance Officer, 1971 ACJ 219 (Ker.), 1971 Ker. LT 380;Mangilal v. Parasram, AIR 1971 M.P. 5, 1970 ACJ 86 (M.P.);M/s Marine and General Insurance Company Limited v. Dr. Balkrishna Ramchandra Nayan, AIR 1977 Bom. 53, 1976 ACJ 288 (Bom.);Haji Zakaria v. Naoshir Cama, AIR 1976 A.P. 171, 1976 ACJ 320 (A.P.);British India General Insurance Company Limited v. Captain Itbar S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2001KAR4722; 2002(4)KarLJ363
ORDERM.P. Chinnappa, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri Jayakumar S. Patil, the learned Government Advocate Sri B.V. Muralidhar for the respondents 1 and respondents 2. Though notices were served on the 3rd and 4th respondents, they remained absent and also heard Sri S.J. Chouta, the learned Counsel for the 5th respondent. 2. The facts which are not seriously in dispute are that the 3rd respondent is a co-operative society. It has Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Accountant, Cashier and Clerks, etc., in its establishment. The post of a Secretary became vacant in the year 1997 and the Board of Management decided to call for willingness of 17 eligible employees of the bank. Out of 17 eligible employees only the petitioner and the 5th respondent gave their willingness. It was also decided by the Board of Management to conduct a written and viva voce test for selecting the candidate to the post of Secretary. In the meantime, the petitioner who is junior to the 5th respond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2002KAR2009; 2002(3)KarLJ129
ORDERMohamed Anwar, J. 1. By this writ petition, a writ of mandamus is prayed:'(i) declaring the order of the third respondent in case No. CMW-36; CAP 86, dated 11-12-1990 (Annexure-J) is bad in law and void; (ii) declaring the order of the second respondent dated 2-11-1987 (Annexure-H) is bad in law and void; (iii) directing the first respondent to prosecute the claim only before the Commissioner of Payments appointed under Act as per Annexure-D, and recover monies only out of the amounts deposited under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act; (iv) for costs of these proceedings and for such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case'. 2. Annexure-H is the order of respondent 2-Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Belgaum ('R2-Registrar' in short), passed in Dispute No. B.DDS.DAM.28/1978-79, rejecting the contentions of petitioners, who were defendants therein, that the dispute under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [2002(93)FLR1043]; ILR2002KAR2337; 2002(3)KarLJ65
Kumar Rajaratnam, J.1. The appellant was appointed as a Second Division Clerk by the 1st respondent-Corporation on a temporary basis for four months, on 7-8-1990, on a consolidated salary of Rs. 800/- + Rs. 60/- as medical allowance. In the order it was stated that the appellant is liable to be terminated at any time without assigning any reason. The appellant's temporary appointment was extended from time to time, but ultimately by an office order dated 31-1-1998 the respondent 1 terminated the service of the appellant in terms of Clause 3 of the Karnataka State Seeds Corporation Limited Service Rules, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules').2. The grievance of the appellant was that he was appointed on a temporary basis on 7-8-1990 and continued in service till he was terminated from service on 31-1-1998 and was not regularised. The appellant challenged his termination before the learned Single Judge.3. The learned Single Judge relied on Rule 6(c) of the Service Rules of the fi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2003(4)KarLJ412
K. Sreedhar Rao, J. 1. The appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed in R.A. No. 76 of 1996 on the file of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bagalkot, arising out of judgment and decree passed by the Munsiff Court, Hungund in O.S. No. 22 of 1990. The appellants herein are the legal representatives of the plaintiff. One G.B. Bhandaragal, plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 9,996.2 ps. with costs and interest from the respondents. The material facts leading to the appeal are stated thus.2. The deceased plaintiff G.B. Bhandaragal was the Chairman of Vyvasaya Seva Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha (in short 'VSSSN'), Ilkal, for the period 1981-1983. It is said that the respondents 3 to 11, who are the Directors of the VSSSN, Ilkal manipulated the records showing the utilisation of funds of the Society by the plaintiffs and got initiated the proceedings under Section 70 of the Co-operative Societies Act and eventually an award came to be passed against the plaintif...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [2006]146STC300(Kar)
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. The appellants in these two appeals are registered dealers under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, 'the KST Act'). They purchase bedsheets, bedspreads, napkins and terry towels, all in lengths, from manufacturers and/or their agents in other States and sell them locally at Bangalore to retail dealers and non-dealer customers. Facts in S.T.A. No. 35 of 2000:2. The appellant had declared total sales turnover of Rs. 37,63,546.40 for the assessment period 1998-99 and claimed exemption from sales tax in regard to the entire sales turnover on the ground that textiles were exempt from tax under entry No. 3 (old entry No. 8A) of the Fifth Schedule to the Act. The assessing authority made an order of assessment dated December 2, 1999. He found that the assessee had purchased terry towels (turkey towels) of the total value of Rs. 4,95,752, during the assessment period. He determined the sales turnover relating to terry towels as Rs. 5,43,345 by adding 9.6 per ce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2004KAR2853
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. The petitioners are the Members of 2nd respondent society. They are seeking to quash the entire proceedings in the suit in O.S.No. 264/ 2003 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn), Mangalore. The suit was filed to declare the election notice issued as null and void. The Trial Court granted interim order restraining conduct of election till the disposal of the suit. These Writ Petitions are filed seeking to quash the entire proceedings in the suit on the principal ground that there is express bar of suit under Section 118(1)(c) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act as the basis for the suit falls within the definition of 'dispute' under Section 70(2)(c) of the Act.2. Learned Counsel for respondents 4 to 7 filed detailed counter statement questioning the locus stand of the petitioners and maintainability of Writ Petitions on the ground that application could have been filed for vacating the interim order. In this regard, the decisions reported in PU...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2005ACJ479; 2004(5)KarLJ7
R.V. Raveendran, J. 1. Respondent herein was the driver of lorry bearing Registration No. CAM-105 of which second appellant is the owner and first appellant is the insurer. Respondent sustained an employment injury on 4-2-1996 when driving the said lorry. He sustained serious injuries to the right leg (comminuted fracture of middle and lower one-third of right fibula, oblique fracture of midshaft of right tibia, fracture of head of left fibula, fracture of lower pole of right patella and oblique comminuted fracture of distal shaft of second metatarsal).2. The petitioner filed a claim petition (W.C. No. 4 of 1996) under Section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 ('Act' for short), praying for award of Rupees Three lakhs as compensation, in respect of the said injuries. In the claim petition the respondent (also referred to as the 'workman') averred that he was aged 35 years and was getting a salary of Rs. 2,000/- per month apart from Rs. 25/- per day as batta, at the time of acc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR2004Kant390; ILR2004KAR3140
ORDERS. Abdul Nazeer, J.1. The petitioner claims to be a member of the Karnataka Rural Homeopathic Medical Practitioners' Association, Gokak, practicing Homeopathic system of Medicine at Hole Alur. According to him, he has vast experience in Homeopathic system of medicine and that he has been taking special care for the poor patients satisfying all their medical needs. It is his further case that the Homeopathic Medical Practitioners in Karnataka and Karnataka Rural Homeopathic Medical Practitioners' Association, Gokak, have been urging the Government of Karnataka to open Registration for the benefit of the un-registered Homeopathic Medical Practitioners, to get themselves registered in accordance with the provisions of the Homoeopathic Medical Practitioners' Act. Though several representations were filed, the State has not heeded to their request. The Registrar of Karnataka Ayurvedic & Unani Practitioners Board, issued a notice as per Annexure-D calling upon the petitioner to appear b...
Tag this Judgment!