Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jul-29-1994
Reported in : 1994(4)KarLJ452; (1995)IILLJ399Kant
ORDERTirath Singh Thakur, J.1. These three petitions involve near identical questions of law and fact and are therefore being disposed of by this common judgment.2. A few facts necessary for me disposal of these cases may be stated first:The Chief Engineer (General) of the respondent-Board by his order dated May 15, 1985 submitted a proposal to the Board that Three hundred and forty four posts of Assistant Engineers (Electrical) be upgraded as Assistant Ex.Engineers. This proposal was made in pursuance of a representation received by Board from the K.E.B.Engineers Association, suggesting such an upgradation, to remove stagnation faced by Assistant Engineers (Electrical) who had been working as such for 10 years or more. It was pointed out by the Chief Engineer that the proposed upgradation will not involve any additional financial burden for the Board because all those incumbents of the posts recommended for upgradation had been given the next higher grade (in time scale scheme) which ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jul-29-1994
Reported in : ILR1994KAR2771; (1995)IILLJ399Kant
ORDERTirath Singh Thakur, J1. These three Petitions involve near identical questions of law and fact and are therefore being disposed of by this common Judgment.2. A few facts necessary for the disposal of these cases may be stated first:The Chief Engineer (General) of the respondent Board by his order dated 15th of May, 1985 submitted a proposal to the Board that Three hundred and forty four posts of Assistant Engineers (Electrical) be Up-graded as Assistant Executive Engineers. This proposal was made in pursuance of a representation received by Board from the K.E.B. Engineers Association, suggesting such an Up-gradation, to remove stagnation faced by Assistant Engineers (Electrical) who had been working as such for 10 years or more. It was pointed out by the Chief Engineer that the proposed Up-gradation will not involve any additional financial burden for the Board because, all those incumbents of the posts recommended for Up-gradation had been given the next higher grade (in time sc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : May-04-1994
Reported in : [1995]82CompCas179(Kar); 1995(39)KarLJ48
..... foreign exchange which was found vital to the economy of the country. the transfer of shares also involved under section 111 of the companies act. in this background requisition of the shareholders to convene a general body meeting was under consideration. 34. in this background, the hon'ble supreme court examined the notice requisitioning the meeting of the company by the life insurance corporation of india and held that this action of the life insurance corporation was not liable to be questioned on any of the grounds on which it was sought to be questioned in the writ petition ..... if the balance is fairly even then it may not be improper to take into account in tipping the balance the relative strength of each party's case as revealed by the affidavit evidence adduced on the hearing of the application.' 43. the appellant is a shareholder of this company. she having noted the events that took place following the general meeting dated september 30, 1993, has expressed the apprehension that in the background of so many ..... the instruments for this ugly state of affairs. therefore, a brief advertence to the undisputed facts is necessary and they are as follows : 4. the first respondent is a public limited company incorporated under the provisions of the companies act, 1956. its incorporation was in the year 1971. the idea was initially mooted by late padmashri dr. madhava anantha pai, president, academy of general education, manipal, d. k. who also served as a director and chairman .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jul-29-1994
Reported in : 1995(1)KarLJ113
ORDER1. A joint request was made by the Management of the Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board and its workmen to the State Government to make a Reference of the Dispute existing between them for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore, Consequently, a Reference was made by the Government of Karnataka under No. SWL 579 LLD 70 dated 16th August 1979, to the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore on the following points of dispute :- '1) Are the workmen justified in demanding bonus from the management of Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board 2) If not, to what relief the workmen are entitled ?' 2. On receipt of the Reference by the Tribunal it recorded evidence adduced by the parties and by its award dated 27th December, 1983 held that the employees of the Board excepting those engaged at its 4 pumping stations and two treatment plants, were not justified in demanding Bonus. In arriving at the said conclusion the Tribunal found that the Pumping Stations and the treatment plant...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jul-29-1994
Reported in : ILR1994KAR2794
ORDERTirath Singh Thakur, J1. A joint request was made by the Management of the Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board and its workmen to the State Government to make a Reference of the Dispute existing between them for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore. Consequently, a Reference was made by the Government of Karnataka under No. SWL 579 LLD 70 dated 16th August 1979, to the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore on the following points of dispute :-'1) Are the workmen justified in demanding bonus from the management of Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board?2) If not, to what relief the workmen are entitled?'2. On receipt of the Reference by the Tribunal it recorded evidence adduced by the parties and by its award dated 27th December, 1983 held that the employees of the Board excepting those engaged at its 4 pumping stations and two treatment plants, were not justified in demanding Bonus. In arriving at the said conclusion the Tribunal found that the Pumping Stations and the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-01-1994
Reported in : I(1995)ACC31
M. Ramakrishna, J.1. The appellant--Oriental Insurance Company being aggrieved by the Judgment and Award passed by the M.A.C.T., Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, in M.V.C. 1585/88 on 13.8.1990, has come up before this Court in these Appeals under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (herein after called the Act).2. The appellant has sought for setting aside the findings recorded by the Tribunal in regard to the liability of the Insurer to make good the compensation on more than one ground.3. The undisputed facts are borne out of the records are that the tractor and trailer bearing registration No. MEZ 6506 and 6507 respectively belonging to Nanjegowda, one of the respondents herein, dashed against the Scooter from behind on Bangalore Bellary road on 5.7.1988 at 7.00 A.M. causing injuries to the rider and the pillion rider of the scooter. The rider husband of R-1, succumbed to the injuries. Later Rukmini Bai, R-1 and her two minor children along with the parents of the deceas...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-26-1994
Reported in : ILR1994KAR3441; [1995]211ITR256(KAR); [1995]211ITR256(Karn)
S. Rajendra Babu, J. 1. These two petitions are filed by a company, who is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'). Several payments are made by the petitioner such as salaries, interest, etc. The said deductions were being credited to the account of the Income tax Officer, Company Ward No. 4(1), Bangalore. The petitioner claims that in respect of tax deducted at source (TDS), jurisdiction had been conferred upon the Income-tax Officer, Company Ward No. 4(1), Bangalore, by the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax (Karnataka, Goa and Kerala), Bangalore, by his order dated May 31, 1989. The annual return which is required to be furnished under the Act in respect of tax deducted at source were also furnished to the Income-tax Officer, Company Ward No. 4(1), Bangalore. 2. By a letter sent on February 11, 1993, to the petitioner on its failure to deduct tax at source for the guarantee commission credited to the account of Sri Vijay Mallya, director, for the year 1990-9...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-01-1994
Reported in : 1994ACJ811; AIR1995Kant18; ILR1994KAR861; 1994(2)KarLJ138
ORDERRamakrishna, J.1. The appellant-Oriental Insurance Company being aggrieved by the Judgment and Award passed by the M.A;C.T., Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, in M.V.C. 1585/88 on 13-8-1990, has come up before this Court, in these Appeals under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called the 'Act').2. The appellant has sought for setting aside the findings recorded by the Tribunal in regard to the liability of the Insurer to make good the compensation, on more than one ground.3. The undisputed facts as borne out of the records are that the tractor and trailor bearing registration No. MEZ 6506 and 6507 respectively belonging to Nanjegowda, one of the respondents herein, dashed against the Scooter from behind on Bangalore-Bellary road on 5-7-1988 at 7.00 a.m. causing injuries to the rider and the pillion rider of the scooter. The rider husband of R-1, succumbed to the injuries, later Rukmini Bai, R-l and her two minor children along with the parents of the dec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-17-1994
Reported in : AIR1995Kant69; ILR1994KAR2560; 1994(5)KarLJ124
ORDERS. B. Majmudar, C.J.1. Common procedural questions arise for our consideration in O.S.A. 19/93 and other Company Petitions. In Company Petitions, learned single Judge, Rajendra Babu, J., has referred the following two questions for our decision.(1) What is the scope of enquiry or hearing.(2) The nature or contents of order and whether the usual practise of this Court when matters are admitted and interim orders are granted no detailed reasons are setforth, applicable?As the common reference order shows these questions pertain to the stage prior to admission and advertisement of the Company petition moved by the petitioning-creditor for seeking order for winding-up respondent-company on the ground that the Company is unable to pay its debts as envisaged by S. 433(e) of the Act.In O.S.A. No. 19/93 also these procedural questions squarely arise for our consideration. Therefore, they were all heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The common questions pert...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Nov-10-1994
Reported in : [1997]90CompCas496(Kar)
Venkataraman, J. 1. This petition is filed by accused Nos. 1, 3, 5 and 6 in C.C. No. 189 of 1990 on the file of the Special Court (Economic Offences), Metropolitan Areas and District Court of Bangalore, under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, for quashing the proceedings initiated against them on the complaint of the respondent, the Regional Director of the Employees' State Insurance Corporation, for offences under section 85(a) and (g) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 ('the Act', for short). 2. The respondent in the complaint, a copy of which is produced at annexure 'D', has alleged that K.R. Mills at Mysore is a 'factory' as defined under section 2(12) of the Act, that the eight accused persons including the present petitioners are the principal employers of the said factory as defined in section 2(17) of the Act, that under section 40(1) of the Act read with regulation 26 of the Employees State Insurance (General) Regulations, 1950, every principal employer of a...
Tag this Judgment!