Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: motion of thanks Court: karnataka Page 1 of about 3,520 results (0.028 seconds)

S.R. Bommai and Others Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1990Kant5; ILR1989KAR2425

..... in the same session, a motion of thanks was also passed. .....

M.D. Devegowda Vs. State of Karnataka and Others

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1999KAR4087; 2000(2)KarLJ101

..... three of those who had participated in the proceedings were not for any reason entitled to participate or vote for the motion yet, the remaining members constitute 2/3rd of the total membership of the committee andcould therefore have validly passed a resolution ..... anything contained in this act, or the rules, the chairman or the vice-chairman shall not preside over a meeting in which a motion of no-confidence is discussed against him, but he shall have a right to speak and otherwise to take part in the proceedings of the market committee: provided that where a motion of no-confidence is moved both against the chairman and vice-chairman, the director of agricultural marketing or an officer authorised by him in ..... would show that all that the same ensures is that the chairman or the vice-chairman shall not preside over a meeting in which a motion of no-confidence is discussed against them although in any such meeting they shall have a right to speak and to take part. ..... of the things and keeping in view the provisions of the act, it was essential that before a no-confidence motion could be passed against the chairman, those moving the motion should have made out a case of proved misconduct or failure on the part of the incumbent. ..... that would not however be true in a case where the entire body present and voting on the motion is of the unanimous opinion that the person holding the office of chairman or the vice-chairman of the committee had forfeited their confidence and deserved .....

Vidyacharan Shukla Vs. B.S. Adityan

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1989KAR2784

..... now go on to the question which indeed is the core of the controversy between the two sides in that whether the power of removal of an office bearer from office which is akin to the power of a motion of an officer of a corporation and is treated as generally existing in all statutory corporations as an incidental or an inherent power, the exercise of which in the case of corporation is found necessary in the interest of ..... they are right in their contention that these associations are also treated as state within the meaning of article 12 and hence are on par with the statutory corporations in whom the power of a motion is treated as inherent or implied, then, by parity of reasoning one will have to concede the existence of such power being either inherent in such bodies or atleast to exist in them by ..... authorities is that if the law governing a corporation is silent as to the tenure of the officers thereof and also as to their removal, the power of a motion is incidental to that of appointment, and those who have the appointing power may remove an officer appointed by them whenever, in their judgment, the best interests of ..... amplification of this sorted against shukla is the multi-pronged objection that irrespective of the potency of shukla's claim against the validity of the no confidence motion plaintiff shukla was not entitled to any relief at the hands of this court (1) because of his conduct (2) his failure to seek a declaration of the validity of the action taken to remove .....

Hanamappa Chetrappa Koppal Vs. Nil

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1991KAR602; 1991(1)KarLJ316

..... in the above cited decision the delhi high court has held that it is clear that the requirement of a motion within the time specified under sub-section (2) of section 13-b is merely a matter of formality and a decree for divorce by mutual consent can be granted without waiting for the period of six months specified under sub-section (2) of ..... the decree was challenged on the ground that the court could not have acted upon it because the motion under sub-section (2) of section 13-b could have been made not earlier than six months after the filing of the joint application filed as well as the motion under sub-section (2) of section 13 of the act had been made by a single application, lodha, j. ..... the learned counsel for the petitioners has further made a motion in this court that the decree of divorce to be granted instantly. ..... of divorce would be in the interest of both of them, it need not attach much importance of waiting for the expiry of the period of six months or eighteen months, the court could grant a decree of divorce by mutual consent instantly if motion is made by the parties.18. ..... (2) on the motion of both the parties made not earlier than six months after the date of the presentation of the petition referred to in sub-section (1) and not later than eighteen months after the said date, if the .....

Justice Subhash B. Adi Vs. The Secretary, Karnataka Legislative Assemb ...

Court : Karnataka

..... the chief justice or the judge nominated by him contains a finding that the lokayukta or upa-lokayukta against whom charges were framed is guilty of any misbehaviour or suffers from any incapacity, then the motion referred to in sub-section (2) shall together with the report of the chief justice of the high court of karnataka or the judge of the high court as the case may be ..... of karnataka or the judge of the high court contains a finding that the lokayukta or upa-lokayukta against whom charges were framed is guilty of any misbehaviour or suffers from any incapacity, then the motion referred to in sub-section (2) shall, together with the report of the chief justice of the high court of karnataka or the judge of the high court, as the case may ..... the lok sabha for presenting an address to the president for the removal of the judge concerned as well as the decision of the speaker of the 9th lok sabha to admit the motion and constitute a committee under the provisions of the judges inquiry act have lapsed with the dissolution of the 9th lok sabha.. the union of india contended the effect of ..... for its consideration and the parliament is required to take it into account before it decides to accept the finding of guilty and act on it by adopting the motion of removal by the requisite majority or not to adopt the motion which would terminate the proceedings for removal, it would indicate that the opportunity of this kind in the scheme to show cause is against the inchoate .....

Justice Subhash B Adi Vs. The Secretary

Court : Karnataka

..... court of karnataka or the judge of the high court contains a finding that the lokayukta or upalokayukta against whom charges were framed is guilty of any misbehaviour or suffers from any incapacity, then the motion referred to in sub-section (2) shall, together with the 66 report of the chief justice of the high court of karnataka or the judge of the high court, as the case ..... the chief justice or the judge nominated by him contains a finding that the lokayukta or upalokayukta against whom 75 charges were framed is guilty of any misbehaviour or suffers from any incapacity, then the motion referred to in sub- section (2) shall together with the report of the chief justice of the high court of karnataka or the judge of the high court as the case may be ..... the lok sabha for presenting an address to the president for the removal of the judge concerned as well as the decision of the speaker of the 9th lok sabha to admit the motion and constitute a committee under the provisions 41 of the judges inquiry act have lapsed with the dissolution of the 9th lok sabha.. the union of india contended the effect of ..... its consideration and the parliament is required to take it into account before it decides to accept the finding of 'guilty' and act on it by adopting the motion of removal by the requisite majority or not to adopt the motion which would terminate the proceedings for removal, it would indicate that the opportunity of this kind in the scheme to show cause is against the inchoate .....

Khimijibhai Mills and anr. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Commercial T ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2001KAR520; [2001]122STC32(Kar)

..... section 22-a(1) and (2) respectively revisional powers have been conferred on the additional commissioner and commissioner against the orders mentioned in those sub-sections to call for and examine the record of any proceedings on their own motion if the additional commissioner/commissioner considers that any order passed therein by any officer sub-ordinate to him is erroneous and in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, can stay the operation ..... turnover under section 12-a within a period of eight years from the expiry of the year to which the tax relates ; under section 21 revisional powers have been conferred on the joint commissioners on his own motion to call for and examine the record of any order passed or proceedings recorded under the provisions of the act by an officer not above the rank of the deputy commissioner for satisfying himself as to the ..... a close reading of sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 22-a would indicate that the additional commissioner or commissioner, as the case may be, on his own motion, can call for and examine the records of any proceedings under the act, if he considers that any order passed by any officer subordinate to him is erroneous and prejudicial to the ..... --(1) the additional commissioner may on his own motion call for and examine the record of any proceeding under this act and if he considers that any order passed therein by any officer who is not above the rank of a joint commissioner, is erroneous in so far as .....

Adarsh R Iyer Vs. Lokayukta

Court : Karnataka

..... of the high court of karnataka or the judge of the high court contains a finding that the lokayukta or upa-lokayukta against whom charges were framed is guilty of any misbehaviour or suffers from any incapacity, then the motion referred to in sub-section (2) shall, together with the report of the chief justice of the high court of karnataka or the judge of the high court, as the case may be, taken up for consideration by the house or the houses ..... to initiate action against 78 members of karnataka state legislative assembly on the ground that they have committed the offence punishable under section 17(2) of the karnataka lokayukta act, 1984 ( the act for short), as their notice of motion given in writing under 3 - - wp.nos.6458-6459/2018 section 6(2) of the act for removal of an upa-lokayukta failed by operation of section 6(10) of the act. ..... legislature, no reference to the chief justice of the high court of karnataka shall be made unless the motion has been admitted in both the houses and where such a motion is admitted in both houses, the matter shall be referred to the chief justice of the high court of karnataka jointly by the speaker and the chairman: provided further that where notices of a motion as aforesaid are given in the houses of legislature on different dates, the notice which is given later .....

Rajya Vokkaligara Sangha Vs. Sri. M. Puttaswamy

Court : Karnataka

..... institutions as well as the expert nominee (co-opted) are entitled to participate in the special meeting of the committee and also to vote at the same meeting as regards the no-confidence motion, the non-service of the notice of the said meeting on the aforesaid directors renders the said special meeting illegal as there has been an infringement of the provisions of the said ..... within the frame work of section 15 of the karnataka societies registration act, 1960 and no notice was issued and there is no deficiency in the notice and while passing the no confidence motion, notice is mandatory and no notice is given and the very document of 09.06.2023 is not sustainable in the eye of law and there is fundamental breach in not issuing the 60 notice ..... the karnataka societies registration act, 1960 is very clear that the plaintiffs can seek the relief before the registrar and section 25 is also very clear that the registrar may on his own motion and shall on the application of the majority of the members of the governing body or of not less than one-third of the members of the society, hold an enquiry or direct ..... is unwarranted and each and everyone of executive committee are entitled to participate in the special meeting of the committee and also to vote at the same meeting as regards the no confidence motion, 38 the non-service of the notice of the said meeting on the directors renders the said special meeting illegal as there has been an infringement of the provisions of the act and .....

Dr. Renukaprasad K V Vs. Sri. M Puttaswamy

Court : Karnataka

..... institutions as well as the expert nominee (co-opted) are entitled to participate in the special meeting of the committee and also to vote at the same meeting as regards the no-confidence motion, the non-service of the notice of the said meeting on the aforesaid directors renders the said special meeting illegal as there has been an infringement of the provisions of the said ..... within the frame work of section 15 of the karnataka societies registration act, 1960 and no notice was issued and there is no deficiency in the notice and while passing the no confidence motion, notice is mandatory and no notice is given and the very document of 09.06.2023 is not sustainable in the eye of law and there is fundamental breach in not issuing the 60 notice ..... the karnataka societies registration act, 1960 is very clear that the plaintiffs can seek the relief before the registrar and section 25 is also very clear that the registrar may on his own motion and shall on the application of the majority of the members of the governing body or of not less than one-third of the members of the society, hold an enquiry or direct ..... is unwarranted and each and everyone of executive committee are entitled to participate in the special meeting of the committee and also to vote at the same meeting as regards the no confidence motion, 38 the non-service of the notice of the said meeting on the directors renders the said special meeting illegal as there has been an infringement of the provisions of the act and .....