Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka prohibition act 1961 section 11 delegation Page 1 of about 85,259 results (0.405 seconds)

Chamundi Hotel (P) Ltd. and ors. Vs. State and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1997KAR1573

..... of india1993(1) sco 78, in this regard is misconceived, because in that case, while determining the scope of section 269-ud of the income tax act, 1961, the court held that opportunity to show cause must be afforded to intending purchaser and seller of property, before making an order of compulsory purchase of the ..... power, e.g. in article 303 or article 286(2). but unless and until the court came to the conclusion that the constitution itself had expressly prohibited legislation on the subject either absolutely or conditionally the power of the state legislature to enact legislation within its legislative competence was plenary. once the topic of ..... private property of the former ruler of mysore. controversy raised is with respect to the enactment of the bangalore palace (acquisition and transfer) act, 1996 (karnataka act no. 18/1996) (hereinafter called 'the act').2. the petitioners have stated that the value of the palace and the adjoining lands is rs. 3,000 crores, approximately. it is .....

Rudrappa Mahadevappa Humbi (Deceased) by L.Rs and ors. Vs. Shivalingap ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2001(6)KarLJ394

..... constructions made by them', when they handed over the vacant possession to the lessors-landlords herein.4. during the subsistence of the lease, the karnataka rent control act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'act' for brevity) came into force, which governed the relationship of the landlord and tenant in the matter of evictions and other matters provided therein.5 ..... sub-lease complained of by the landlord was at a point of time much after coming into force part 5 of the karnataka rent control act, 1961 and also the act. therefore,section 23 of the act, applies to the facts of the case. by that section, he is debarred from sub-leasing,23. shri subhash b. adi ..... iyengar deserves to be accepted for the following reasons.-section 23 of the karnataka rent control act prohibits the tenant from sub-leasing the leased property after the commencement of part v of the act. the act came into force on 16-11-1961. section 23 of the act reads as under.- '(1) notwithstanding anything contained in any law, but .....

H.T. Annaji Vs. the District Magistrate and the Deputy Commissioner, H ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 1998(4)KarLJ75

..... been taken as decision no. 1 in annexure-a can well be said to be covered by section 31-b of the karnataka police act. there is power under section 31-d also to put a restriction or prohibition on the displaying of any pictures, advertisements, news hoards or public notices as well on the vessels or boat in territorial waters ..... in the above mentioned writ petition to the effect that when power is vested in the authority to issue notification under a different clause of section 31(1) of karnataka act no. 4 of 1964 then mere wrong mentioning of clause-g will not vitiate the order or notification. annexure-c and d are held to be legal and perfectly ..... notifications appear to have been issued in the context of the facts mentioned above which indicate that the power has been exercised under section 31(1)(b) of the karnataka police act, 1963. so these notifications are held valid and relief no. (ii) in para 18 claimed in the claim petition is hereby rejected. learned counsel for the petitioner .....

Veranna Veerabhadrappa Vs. the District Registrar and anr.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR2005Kant27; ILR2004KAR4699; 2004(7)KarLJ646

..... which the declaration has been published under section 19 of the bangalore development authority act 1976 or section 19 of the karnataka urban development authorities act, 1987. therefore, as could be seen from the above provisions that what is prohibited is alienation of lands situated in urban area which has been acquired by the government ..... have been either acquired by government or in respect of which acquisition proceedings have been initiated by the government. sections 3 & 4 of the act read as under: 3. prohibition on transfer of lands acquired by government - no person shall purport to transfer by sale, mortgage, gift, lease or otherwise any land ..... the registration act as well as the karnataka (restriction on transfer) act 1991, hereinafter called the restriction on transfer act, and under the urban land ceiling act. it was contended by the learned senior counsel that the sub-registrar has no power to refuse to register the sale deed when none of the acts prohibit the registration .....

V.D.S.R.Re.Rolling Mill. Vs. the Special Commissioner and Commissioner ...

Court : Chennai

..... respondent 3 and 4. thus the respondents 3 and 4 became tenants. they filed an application in form-7 under section 48-a of the karnataka land reforms act, 1961, for registering them as occupants thereof, and that the land tribunal concerned having held an enquiry, granted occupancy rights in their favour, as prayed ..... of law or on the basis of rules or regulations governing such grant. after the coming into force of the karnataka scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prohibition of transfer of certain lands) act, 1978 (karnataka act 2 of 1979), notices were issued by the appropriate authority to the transferees of such lands to show cause as ..... this ground also, the petition should fail. secondly, the grants made in favour of the original grantees are admittedly free grants. the rule governing the grant prohibited alienation of the lands in question permanently. the lands in question were granted to scheduled caste person taking into account their social backgrounds, poverty, illiteracy and .....

Tashi Delek Gaming Solutions (Private) Limited and ors. Vs. State of K ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR2005Kant261; ILR2005KAR1548; 2005(2)KarLJ403

..... dated 24-7-2004 issued in exercise of powers conferred by section 5 of the lotteries (regulation) act, 1998 (for short, 'the act') the government of karnataka declared the state to be a free zone from online and internet lotteries and prohibited the sale of all computerized and online lottery tickets marketed and operated through vending machines, terminals, electronic ..... learned single judge also held that it was the state government alone which could prohibit the sale of lottery tickets in a state under section 5 of the act and when the sale is so prohibited as has been done by the state of karnataka by the impugned notification, it was only the state of sikkim or other state ..... governments which could feel aggrieved by the said prohibition and not any individual. it was further held that .....

Rahamtulla and ors. Vs. State

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 1978CriLJ109

..... /1971 convicting the petitioners who were respectively a-l, a-2, a-3, a-5, a-6 and a-7 under section 14 (2) r/w 32 of the karnataka excise act and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months and to pay a fine of rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo r ..... be sufficient to meet the ends of justice if instead of sentencing them to imprisonment an order is made under section 4 of the p. o. act.4. no doubt section 32 of the karnataka excise act prescribes for the first offence a minimum sentence of three months' rigorous imprisonment and fine of not less than rs. 100/-. but, as pointed out by ..... three months' r.i. and a fine of not less than rs. 100/- is prescribed by the karnataka excise act for a person found guilty of the offence under section 32 of that act, the court can still resort to the provisions of the p.o. act if the conditions required for the application of those provisions exist. in the case on hand, there .....

Harikumar Vs. State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : I(1994)DMC356; ILR1993KAR3035; 1994(3)KarLJ335

..... 13th april 1993, has referred the following point of law for decision of the full bench as per section 7 of the karnataka high court act, 1961. the said point of law reads as under:- 'whether section 8-a of the dowry prohibition act, 1961 is constitutionally and legally valid?' 2. we have heard learned advocate appearing for the appellant-accused and the learned advocate general ..... for respondent-state of karnataka, as well as the learned standing counsel for the central government, who has waived service of notice issued to the attorney .....

G.M. Venkatareddy and Others Vs. the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar Distri ...

Court : Karnataka

..... 1988 that they filed an application before the assistant commissioner under section 4 read with section 5 of the karnataka scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prohibition of transfer of certain lands) act, 1978 inter alia praying for cancellation of the sale transaction and also restoration of the land in question ..... decisions declaring the sale transaction in favour of the appellants violates the provisions of the karnataka scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prohibition of transfer of certain lands) act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the ptcl act for the sake of brevity).while we deal with the specific facts and contentions of ..... allottees. the government have allotted those lands as per saguvali chit containing prohibition of alienation of the land. subsequently, the karnataka scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prohibition of transfer of certain lands) act, 1978 was enacted totally prohibiting the alienation up to a particular period. the proceedings were initiated against .....

O. Dyamappa Vs. Apanna Bhovi and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1997KAR1283; 1997(3)KarLJ683

..... that on an application made by the legal heir of dasabhovi (original grantee) the first respondent herein, action was initiated under the provisions of the karnataka scheduled castes & scheduled tribes (prohibition of transfer of certain lands) act, 1978 to enable the state of resume the land and hand it over to the original grantee or his legal heir's. this was resisted by ..... dealt with all the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and rejected the writ petition holding that the provisions of the karnataka schedule castes & scheduled tribes (prohibition of transfer of certain lands) act over-rides any right conferred under the karnataka land reforms act in favour of the petitioner since the original grantee had alienated the land granted to him within the .....