Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-10-1978
Reported in : [1979]49CompCas931(Kar); (1979)IILLJ176aKant
Rama Jois, J.1. Whether the Syndicate Bank, which is a corporate body constituted under the provisions of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') falls within the definition of the word 'State' as defined in art. 12 of the Constitution and consequently a writ petition is maintainable under art. 226 of the Constitution against the order passed by it against its employees in contravention of the rules regulating their conditions of service is the question that arises for consideration in this case. 2. Facts :- The petitioner was appointed as a clerk on the establishment of the Syndicate Bank on April 25, 1960. He was confirmed in the said post with effect from March 25, 1961. At that time, the Syndicate Bank was a banking company. The said bank was taken over along with other banks under the provisions of the Act. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as an officer by the order of the general manager dated Octobe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Apr-19-1978
Reported in : AIR1980Kant86
Venkatachaliah, J.1. A Division Bench of this Court has, in a matter arising under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') referred the following question of law to a Full Bench for its opinion:'Whether in the case of a disputed demand for contribution under the E. S. I. Act by the E. S. I. Corporation, the latter alone should raise a dispute before the Employees' State Insurance Court in accordance with Sections 75 and 77 of the E. S. I. Act or any other provision therein; or, whether it is the Employer against whom such levy is made, and by whom it is disputed, who should raise such a dispute before the E. S. 1. Court for adjudication?'2. The facts leading up to the reference are that a certain employer namely, F. Fibre Bangalore (P) Ltd., on being called upon to pay the Insurance Contributions under the Act, on a sum of Rs. 97,819-37, claimed by the Employees, State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation') to be th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Oct-19-1978
Reported in : AIR1979Kant83; ILR1979KAR646; 1979(1)KarLJ283
1. This appeal is by the decree-holder and is directed against the judgment dated 10-1-1977 passed by the Second Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore City in Execution Appeal No. 60 of 1976 on his file allowing appeal instituted by the judgment-debtor, on setting aside the order passed by the Munsiff (Executing Court) on 7-10-1976 in Execution No. 406 of 1976, on his file. 2. The decree-holder sought execution of the decree obtained by him in O. S. No. 1676 of 1967 for Rupees 7,000/- with cost and interest against the judgment-debtor in Execution No. 406 of 1976 before the learned Munsiff. The judgment-debtor raised several contentions. One of them was that he was a debtor within the meaning of the Karnataka Debt Relief Act, 1976, (hereafter referred to as the Act) and that he was entitled to relief contemplated under S. 4 of the Act. The learned Munsiff disallowed that contention. The judgment-debtor went up in appeal before the learned Civil Judge, who on hearing the parties came to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Sep-28-1978
Reported in : [1980]121ITR551(KAR); [1980]121ITR551(Karn)
Venkataramaiah, J.1. These two appeals are filed against the common order passed in Writ Petitions Nos. 7496 and 7497 of 1978 by Puttaswamy J. dismissing the petitions. The appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') was the petitioner in the said petitions and the ITO, Company Circle III, Bangalore, was the respondent. In the writ petitions the assessee prayed for the issue of an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the two notices dated March 25, 1978, issued by the respondent under s. 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), proposing to reassess the income of the assessee for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 on the ground that he had reason to believe that certain income of the assessee had escaped assessment in each of the above assessment years and for a writ in the nature of prohibition restraining the respondent from taking any steps pursuant to the said notices. 2. Briefly stated the facts are these : The assessee is a privat...
Tag this Judgment!