Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR2004Kant155; III(2004)BC252; ILR2004KAR942; 2004(3)KarLJ45
..... the entire 25% of the price of the house if the petitioner should have committed any default. however, both on the principles of section 73 of the indian contract act as well as on article 14 of the constitution of india, i am of the view that the action on the part of the first respondent to forfeit the entire ..... respondent is a sum of rs. 4,06,274/-.9. the first respondent which is 'state' within the meaning of article 12, of the constitution of india, is expected to act in a fair and non-arbitrary manner. it is no doubt true that the terms of the sale deed is in favour of the first respondent to deduct or forfeit ..... date it was due from the petitioner till the realisation of this amount from the subsequent purchaser.6. having regard to the provisions of section 73 of the indian contract act, 1972, while the first respondent is entitled to claim compensation for the loss or damage that they have incurred due to the breach of contract by the petitioner by not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR2004Kant164
..... tribunal requires confirmation.5. brief facts in w.p. no. 36937-38 of 2003: these two petitions are filed by the president, transport co-operative society limited, koppa, chikkamagalur district, challenging the very order that is under challenge in the earlier connected petitions. petitioner in these petitions states that the petitioner is the ..... respondent has filed an application on 20-3-1998 for grant of replacement of the vehicle by a later model vehicle under section 83 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 ('act' for short). while considering the said application, second respondent, the secretary, regional transport authority, shimoga, granted permission by an order dated 20-3-1998. ..... is not to nullify a provision of law. in the circumstances of this case, discretion is a conditional discretionary power under section 86(5) of the act. this argument of the respondent therefore has no legs to stand in a court of law.18. learned counsel for the respondents placed before me various judgments .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2003KAR2304
..... the court below i.e., fdp no. 5/1997 as per section 49 read with schedule-ll, article (iii)(i)(a) of the karnataka court fees and suits valuation act, 1958 ('act' for short).' 6. when the matter came up for admission, learned counsel for the first respondent (plaintiff in the suit) raised an objection in regard to court fee. ..... stated that the court fee payable in regard to the first relief (partition) is rs. 200/- under section 35(2) of the karnataka court fees and suit valuation act, 1958 ('act' for short). he did not value the second relief nor showed any court fee as a payable in regard to that relief. in regard to the third relief, that ..... as payable by defendant to plaintiff. both parties appeals against the said determination of mesne profits. the appellate court made the following reference under section 5 of the court fees act: 'whether an appeal from a final decree passed under order 20 rule 12(2) cpc , in respect of subsequent mesne profits is not chargeable with ad valorem court .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2001CriLJ3586
..... notification of fixation of maxim selling prices of various categories of iron and steel including black plain iron sheets as required under section 3(6) of essential commodities act, 1955 before the house of parliament publication of the notification has been examined by the apex court in the case reported in air 1979 sc 1149 in ..... the impugned notification at annexure-c has not been published in the karnataka gazette in compliance with section 3(24), clause (b) of the karnataka general clauses act is also not tenable in law for the reason that the non-publishing the same in the gazettee will not vitiate the notification as the publication of the ..... and that in appointing him the state govt. has contravened the statutory provisions and binding rule which are required to be followed mandatorily under the provisions of the act and the rules. therefore the notification annexure-c is questioned by the petitioner and prayed for issuance of a writ of quowarranto. it is contended by the learned .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2001(2)ALT(Cri)309; 2001CriLJ3592
..... there is also no evidence to show that he has lost his self-control on account of intoxication. we do not find any material to accept the contention that his act in causing death of his mother falls under any one of the exceptions to section 300, i.p.c. if that is so, the accused cannot escape the liability under ..... such act to cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide. in view of section 300 of the penal code, except in cases covered by the five exceptions mentioned therein, culpable homicide ..... not create an offence but provides the punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. in view of section 299 of the penal code, whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2001SC1968; II(2001)BC304(SC); [2001]105CompCas385(SC); JT2001(4)SC133; (2001)2MLJ97(SC); 2001(3)SCALE53; (2001)4SCC713; [2001]2SCR714; 2001(2)LC1031(SC); (2001)2UPLBEC1
..... 1 specifically provides that the act shall be made applicable to the whole of india ..... , be it noted that the limitation bill. 1963 was passed by the parliament and subsequently received the assent of the president on 5th october, 1963 and it came into force on 1st january, 1964 as the limitation act 1963 (act 36 of 1963), sub-section 1 of section 1 provides that the act may be called limitation act, 1963 and sub-section 2 of section ..... other hand, a suit filed on the basis of the cause of action arising outside the portuguese law will be governed by the provisions of the indian limitation act. 1963'. 4. during the course of hearing of these appeals, the reasonings as setforth in cadar construction's case (supra) have been relied upon and it .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1997KAR474
..... adverse possession has to be considered in the light of the burden placed on the purchaser of the granted land under sub-section (3) of section 5 of the act. secondly, the plea of adverse possession urged for the first time before the second respondent is also liable to be rejected on the ground that crucial facts, which ..... in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was no enquiry held by the third respondent as required under section 33 of the karnataka land revenue act, 1964. it is not the case of the petitioner that the third respondent denied an opportunity to the petitioner to place necessary material before him. in view of ..... quashed as the said orders came to be passed without there being any enquiry held by the third respondent as required under section 33 of the karnataka land revenue act, 1964. he further submitted that the orders impugned are liable to be quashed on the ground that respondents 2 and 3 have failed to consider that the petitioner .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1982P& H419
..... section 36 of the act calls for some limitation in them in point of time. they do not mean that the settlement officer ..... provision supports the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that some time limit should be placed on the exercise of the revisional power conferred on the state government by s. 42 of the act.'it was held in bhikan v. punjab state, 65 pun lr 368 : (air 1963 punj 255) (fb) that the expression 'at any time' as used in ..... can revoke or vary the scheme even after the purpose of consolidating the holdings is finally accomplished under the act. in chahat khan v. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1977)79BOMLR693
..... june 11, 1973. as the office of this court raised an objection with regard to the delay of 317 days, having regard to the period of limitation laid down under article 114(a) of the limitation act, 1963, the state filed an application being criminal application no. 577 of 1973 for condonation of delay, stating that the copy of the judgment was applied ..... a delay of 317 days on june 11, 1973. the averments made in the application were solemnly affirmed by patkar, clerk in the office of the district magistrate, thana.36. it appears that the criminal appeal and the application for condonation of delay were for hearing for admission before the court on the same day, i.e. july 17, ..... to satisfy the court as to how every day of 317 days delay occurred for a good cause or a sufficient cause within the meaning of section 5 of the limitation act. mr. walawalkar is quite right in his submission that the absence of the usual clerk and the appointment of a new clerk cannot explain the delay of 317 days .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1954Cal113
..... that contention is that section 37 begins with a reservation which is 'except as otherwise provided in this act' and section 36 is a clear provision authorising a suit. although the time limit for such a suit under proviso (a) to section 36 is to be computed from the date of delivery of possession, it does not follow that a suit ..... (sic) by limitation. as a suit under section 36, it was (sic) barred under proviso (a) to that section, inasmuch as the suit had been brought after the expiry of more than a year from the date of delivery of possession and as a suit under section 37, it was barred under article 12(b) of the limitation act, because there ..... principle, evolved under the code, should not be applied to delivery of possession under the public demands recovery act. his lordship thought that the object of making delivery of possession the starting point of the limitation for a suit under section 36 might be to fix a point of time at which the certificate-debtors were bound to have come .....
Tag this Judgment!