Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to declare the bid of the petitioner as technically responsive and direct the respondents to open the financial bid of the petitioner submitted pursuant to the tender notification dtd. 11.11.2015 issued by the R-2 (Annx-A).) 1. The Petitioner initially has approached this Court in this writ petition praying that his bid be declared as responsive and direct the respondents to open the financial bid submitted pursuant to the tender notification dated 11.11.2015. During the pendency of the petition, in view of the subsequent developments, the petitioner has filed an application in No. 2/2016 seeking to amend the petition and that regard an additional prayer is sought for quashing the order/decision of the first respondent in rejecting the technical bid of the petitioner uploaded 28.01.2016 as also the communication dated 14.01.2016 at Annexures-R and X respectively. The said applica...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka - Dharwad
- 1 - NC:2024. KHC-K:7583 WP No.200893 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, R KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE1T DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION No.200893 OF2024(T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S SAHAJ CONSTRUCTION THROUGH ITS SUPERVISOR, MR. DUDHAT GHANSHYAN BHUPATBHAI, AGED31YEARS, REGISTERED OFFICE AT SHOP NO.1, GROUND FLOOR, MA PLAZA, OPP. ABBAS TOWER, NR GANESH NAGAR, RING ROAD, KALABURAGI, KARNATAKA-585101. PETITIONER (BY DR. PODAR., SRI. RAGHAVENDRA C. R., SRI. BHANU MURTHY J S & SRI. VEERSHETTY B K .,ADVOCATE) AND:1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH, THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE), No.137, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001.2. CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001.-. 2 - NC:2024. KHC-K:7583 WP No.200893 of 2024 3. OFFICE OF GST COUNCIL, SECRETARIAT5H FLOOR, TOWER-II, JEEVAN BHARATHI BUILDING, JANAPATH ROAD, CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI-11000...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR2005Kant23; ILR2004KAR4141; 2004(6)KarLJ130
ORDERRamesh, J. 1. This Writ Petition by defendant No. 7 is directed against the interlocutory order of the Trial Court dated 11.6.2004 rejecting his application I.A. No. II filed under Section 151 of CPC to permit him to file written statement in O.S. No. 1225/2002.2. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order. Learned Counsel in support of his submission that the impugned order is erroneous has relied on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in MOHAMMED ANWAR (DECEASED) BY LRS. v. SABIR AND OTHERS, : ILR2004KAR2759 3. The Trial Court by the impugned order has rejected the petitioner's application for leave to file written statement on the ground that it had no power to extend time beyond what is stipulated under Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.4. The suit in question was filed after 01.07.2002 ie., after coming into force of the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002 ('the Amendment Act' for short). The application f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1986(8)ECC6; 1985(5)LC2554(Karnataka); 1986(23)ELT48(Kar)
K.S. Puttaswamy, J.1. On a reference made by one of us (Puttaswamy, J.) these cases were posted before a Division Bench for disposal. 2. As the questions of law that arise for determination in these cases are either common or interconnected, we propose to dispose them by a common order. 3. M/s. Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilisers Limited, a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act of 1956, which is the petitioner in W.P. 3548 of 1978 is engaged in the manufacture of chemicals and fertilisers, at its factory situated near Mangalore. M/s. Ballapir Industries Limited, also a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, which is the petitioner in W.P. No. 4766 of 1981, is engaged in the manufacture of caustic soda, liquid chlorine, Hydrochloric Acid and Sodium Tripoly-phosphate at its factory situated near Karwar. The goods manufactured by the petitioners are exigible to payment of excise duty under and in accordance with the Central Excises and Salt Act ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1953Kant106; AIR1953Mys106
ORDER1. On an application I. A. No. VII filed by the defendant under Rule 20 of the Rules under the Legal Practitioners Act in Original Suit No. 8 of 1950-51 of the court of the Subordinate Judge, Chitaldroog, the sum of Rs. 25/- mentioned in the decree as being payable to defendant towards lawyer's fee is ordered to be amended by raising it to the ad valorem fee on Rs. 4500/-. It is conceded that there is no variance between the judgment and the decree that Rs. 25/- was definitely fixed as Advocate's lee in the judgment by the predecessor of the Judge who has now made the order. The provision of law under which the application is filed cannot justify the amendment as it only refers to the mode in which the fee has to be assessed ordinarily, without affecting the power of the court to disallow or reduce the amount if it thinks fit. This as well as the conditions under which the decree once drawn up may be altered or amended are to be gathered from the provisions of the Code of Civil Pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1971Kant37; AIR1971Mys37; (1970)1MysLJ328
A. Narayana Pai, J.1. The petitioners in these two writ petitions are Co-operative Societies. In both the writ petitions, the challenge is to the exercise by the State Government of the power conferred upon it by Section 54 of the Mysore Co-operative Societies Act 1959, in respect of two Co-operative Societies. As the nature of the challenge and the arguments in support of it are same, the two petitions have been heard together.2. The Society concerned in Writ Petition No. 5861 is the Chitradurga District Co-operative Central Bank Limited, which will hereinafter be referred to as the Bank. The Society concerned in Writ Petition No. 6584 of 1969 is the Mysore State Silk Handloom Weavers' Central Co-operative Society Limited, Bangalore, which will hereinafter be referred to as the Weavers' Society.3. In the case of the Bank, Notification No. DPC. 99 CCB. 69 (I) dated 9th October, 1969 was published in the Mysore Gazette Extra-ordinary No. 478 on 9th October, 1-969. The text of the Notifi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1994KAR195; 1994(1)KarLJ354
Shivaraj Patil, J. 1. The claimant aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 18.1.1988, passed by the Court of the Additional Civil Judge, Bagalkot, in L.A.C.No. 1081 of 1981, has filed this Appeal with a prayer to modify the said judgment and award by granting further enhancement of compensation on various grounds.2. The facts essential for the disposal of this Appeal are the following:An area of 5 acres 10 guntas of land in Sy.No.119/2 of Muranal village in Bagalkot Taluk was acquired pursuant to the Preliminary Notification dated 18.1.1979 published under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act 1894). The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Malaprabha Project, Saundatti - respondent herein, passed the award as per Ext. D-1. The said land was acquired for the purpose of construction of office and staff quarters of Superintendent Engineer, M.C.C.2 and A.E.M.P.C., Bagalkot. The said land was converted for non-agricultural purpose as per the order dated 21.4.1973...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1954Kant115; AIR1954Mys115; (1955)33MysLJ42
1. The facts of this case are not in dispute. The defendant is the son of one Dodda Thimmian who was a member of Hindu Joint family with him and who is now dead. During his lifetime, he had sold to the plaintiff a small piece of land measuring about an acre described in the A schedule to the plaint (which will be referred to hereafter as the suit land) and had put him in possession. After his death the defendant and another younger brother of his, who is also now dead, tried to disturb the plaintiff's possession and he therefore brought a suit in O.S. No. 3 of 42-43 on the file of the Munsif, Tumkur, against them for a permanent injunction. It was held in that suit that the plaintiff was entitled to retain possession of the suit land and that Dodda Thimmiah's sons might get their shares divided arid separated by a suit of their own for partition if the alienation by their father was found not binding on them. Accordingly they filed a suit O.S. No. 208/44-45 against the plaintiff for pa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1986KAR820
ORDERDoddakale Gowda, J.1. Order dated 15-11-1982 of Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore, declining to accord permission for conversion of agricultural land into non-agricultural land under Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Revenue Act') has been set aside by the Appellate Tribunal as per impugned order with a further direction to accord sanction for conversion imposing such conditions as are permissible under law.2. Relief sought for conversion of S. No. 16 situate at Uttarahalli Village, Bangalore South Taluk, has been refused by the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore solely on the ground 'land in question lies' in rural tract (agricultural zone) where no developments are permissible as per the approved Outline Development Plan (hereinafter referred to as 'ODP' of Bangalore.3. Appellate Tribunal has held that there is no justification to refuse permission when adjoining lands such as S. Nos. 15, 17 & 18 are permitted to be used as no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2005KAR1162; 2005(2)KarLJ337
ORDERK. Bhakthavatsala, J. 1. The Petitioner has prayed for a direction to the Respondents to pay the salary for the period from 30.4.1994 to 30.4.1996 and fix the pension on the basis of the last salary that could be paid on 30.4.1996.2. The Respondent Nos. l to 3 are represented by Sri H S Surendra, learned High Court Government pleader. The Respondent No. 4 is represented by Sri B G Sridharan, learned Counsel.3. Heard arguments.4. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner may be stated as under :-During the pendency of the Writ Petition, the Petitioner died. Therefore, his L.Rs., have come on record. It is the case of the Petitioner that he was appointed as an Attender in the Department of Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee in the erstwhile State of Hyderabad. After reorganisation on 1.1.1957, the petitioner was transferred to the Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee under the-jurisdiction of the Karnataka State. As per the Hyderabad Civil Service Rules 1952 governing ...
Tag this Judgment!