Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-23-1988
Reported in : [1992]75CompCas712(Kar); 1989(1)KarLJ52
Navadgi, J. 1. This is defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree dated August 31, 1977,made by the First Additional Civil Judge, Mangalore. The Life Insurance Corporation of India, the appellant, and Smt. B. Kusuma T. Rai, the respondent herein were the defendant and the plaintiff respectively in the trial court. The appellant and the respondent in this appeal, for the sake of convenience, would be referred to in the course of this judgment as the defendant and the plaintiff respectively. 2. The plaintiff filed a suit in O.S. No. 6 of 1975, seeking a decree directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000 as due under the policy bearing No. S. 39675124, a sum of Rs. 5,385 towards interest on Rs. 30,000 from January 6, 1972, to January 3, 1975, at the rate of 6 per cent per annum and a sum of Rs. 15 towards the cost of registered notice. 3. The facts on which the plaintiff founded her reliefs are these : B.S. Thimmappa Rai (hereinafter referred to as 'the assured'),the husban...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Dec-14-1988
Reported in : ILR1989KAR241
..... bangalore municipal corporation act, 1949 and the bye-laws made thereunder:(ii) the purchaser shall not without the approval of the board, construct on the site any building other than a building tor the construction of which the site was allotted, granted or sold;(iii) the purchaser shall not alienate the site within such period as may be specified by the board, except-by mortgage in favour of the government of india, the government of mysore, the life insurance corporation of india or the ..... applicant to be a mysore an by birth or domicile, the construction of the house on the allotted site has to be done within two years after the date of allotment; the site was not to be sub-divided and 'not more than one dwelling house is to be constructed thereon' (condition no. 6). (underlining is by us). the site or the buildings that may be constructed is not be alienated for ten years except with the previous written permission of the board.19. under section 43(3) of the citb act (the city of bangalore improvement act ..... ng taken unawares, by the plea. the appellants and other contesting respondents in the writ petition, in the circumstances of the case, had knowledge of the contention. as observed by the supreme court in nagubaj ammal and ors. v. b. shama rao and ors. : [1956]1scr451 , the true scope of the rule that ho amount of evidence can be looked into upon a plea which was never put-forward, was held as, --'evidence let in an issues on which the parties actually went to trial should .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Dec-15-1988
Reported in : [1989(59)FLR1]; (1989)IILLJ179Kant
1. The first writ petition is presented by an ex-employee of M/s. Wockhard Private Limited questioning the legality of the award of the Labour Court, Bangalore, declining to grant the relief of reinstatement and awarding only compensation in lieu of reinstatement. The two other petitions are presented by the management questioning the legality of the order on a preliminary issue holding that the employee was a 'workman' as defined under the Industrial Disputes Act and also the final award directing the payment of compensation of Rs. 63,000 in addition to the amounts already received by the workman. 2. As the three petitions arise out of the common award made in the same reference, they are being disposed of by this common order. 3. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows : The workman was appointed as a Professional Service Representative ('P.S.R.' for short) in the services of Messrs Workhard Private Limited on 5th January, 1972. He was entrusted with the work of promoting sal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-11-1988
Reported in : ILR1988KAR3092; 1988(3)KarLJ327
Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. This appeal is by the Writ Petitioners, against the dismissal of their Writ Petition. The 1st appellant is referred as the appellant-company hereinafter, for the sake of convenience.2. The question raised pertains to the applicability of the provisions governing fixation of fair rent under the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (for short, referred as the 'R.C. Act'), to the premises leased by the appellant-company to the 1st respondent.3. Appellant-company is a company registered under Indian Companies Act and its entire share capital is owned by the Government of India. It has in possession vast extent of mining area obtained by it on mining tease from the State Government. In some of the areas it has put up structures, which have been granted by it on lease to persons like the 1st respondent. Here, the subject-matter of lease is stated, originally to be a Tailor-shop, converted into a flour-mill, though, the first respondent asserts the same to be a 'building-c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-11-1988
Reported in : [1990]68CompCas216(Kar); ILR1989KAR2562; 1990(3)CLJ38(Karn)
..... balaji mills. those two decisions are balkrishan gupta v. swadeshi polytex ltd. [1985] 59 comp cas 563 (sc) and life insurance corporation of india v. escorts ltd. [1986] 59 comp cas 548 (sc). mr. raghavan maintained that the test should be applied for determining whether a member comes within the scope of section 399 of the act is whether he has got on the register of members or whether he has made any efforts to get on to get on to register of members ..... (1)(c) and 19(1)(g) of the constitution. prayer (d) is for a declaration that the purchases of shares made by and/or on behalf of the caparo group ltd. are illegal and violative of the foreign exchange regulation act, the circulars of the reserve bank issued from time and the provisions of the securities contracts (regulation) act, 1956, and the bye-laws of the stock exchange. prayers (e), (f), (g), (h), (i) again relate to circular no. 18, dated september 19, 1983. prayer (j) is directed towards securing the relevant ..... word 'member' under section 2(27) are not applicable to the fact and circumstances of the case. 32. i have earlier noticed the general rights of a shareholder of a company in swadeshi polytex [1985] 58 comp cas 563 (sc) and escorts' case [1986] 59 comp cas 548 (sc). but a better authority for the exposition of the law on the nature of the rights of shareholders is found in the decision of the supreme court in vasudev ramachandra shelat v. pranlal jayanand thakar [1975] 45 comp cas 43. the facts of that case .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Apr-19-1988
Reported in : [1988]71STC10(Kar)
ORDER1. The above writ petitions and revision petitions are disposed of by a common order since a common point arises for consideration in all these petitions. 2. In the writ petitions, we are concerned with the question whether tarpaulin cloth comes within the meaning of the word 'cotton textiles'. In the sales tax revision petitions, we are concerned with the question whether P.V.C. rexine cloth comes within the meaning of the word 'cotton textiles'. 3. The facts are not in serious controversy and briefly stated are : The petitioners in W.P. Nos. 11213 to 11221 of 1987 are registered dealers under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act as also under the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the C.S.T. Act'). Some of them are manufacturers and some of them are traders in tarpaulins. It is not in dispute that tarpaulin is manufactured out of cotton fabric. Likewise, the petitioners in the revision petitions are dealers in P.V.C. rexine cloth. Cotton fabrics are declared goods under s...
Tag this Judgment!