Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1991KAR2672; 1991(3)KarLJ447
K. Jagannatha Shetty, J.1. This petition is filed under section 391(2) of the Companies Act, 1956, by the petitioner, S. M. Holding Finance Private Limited, who is the petitioner in the matter of Mysore Machinery Manufacturers Limited (in liquidation). 2. The object of the petition is to obtain sanction of the court to a compromise or arrangement whereby the debts of the company (in liquidation), i.e., secured, preferential and unsecured and wages of labour are discharged. That apart, the shareholders of the company (in liquidation) will be repaid their shareholding. 3. It is averred that the company was incorporated under the then Mysore Companies Act (XVIII of 1938) on September 23, 1946, with a nominal capital of Rs. 100,00,000 divided into 10,00,000 equity shares of Rs. 10 each, of which 5,00,000 equity shares were issued and Rs. 10 was paid-up on each share issued. 4. The objects for which the company was formed are set out in the company's memorandum of association. In brief they...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1992]85STC470(Kar)
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J. 1. Since identical question is involved in all these writ petitions they are taken up together. 2. The relevant facts are stated with reference to W.P. No. 13054 of 1987. The petitioner is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('the Act'). The petitioner buys leco from M/s. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited. According to the petitioner it is a trade name and it is ordinarily understood as charcoal used as domestic fuel. The petitioner sells leco for domestic use and to hotels. All these years leco was treated as charcoal and appropriate exemption was being granted under item 29 of the Fifth Schedule to the Act. The goods enumerated in the Fifth Schedule to the Act are exempted from taxation under section 8 of the Act. Item 29 reads as follows : 'Fire-wood or charcoal when sold for domestic use, except to hotels.' The petitioner was served with a notice proposing levy of tax on the sales of leco treating it as coal falli...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1991]81STC164(Kar)
M.P. Chandrakantaraj Urs, J.1. The petitioner is M/s. Mangalore Steel Agency. It is a registered dealer under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It is aggrieved by the assessment orders as at annexure-A concerning its taxable turnover for the period 1st October, 1979 to 31st August, 1980. The total turnover returned was Rs. 68,01,457.50. On identical amount exemption was also claimed inter-alia, on the ground that the goods in question, namely, mild steel rounds, flats, etc., sold to M/s. Canara Wire and Wire Products, Yeyyadi, Mangalore, were goods which had been re-rolled items by the principals of the assessee who claimed to be only an agent. It is clear from the assessment order as at annexure-A that in support of exemption claimed, from No. 32 was not produced, as an agent of the principal as per section 11(1) of the Act. Therefore, the assessing authority came to the conclusion that the sales made were re-rolled iron steel out of tax-paid in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1990KAR3320
S. Mohan, C.J.1. W.A.No. 1229/90. The facts leading to this appeal are as follows:(1) The first respondent Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Minority Communities and Backward Classes Improvement. Centre, Bangalore-26, (hereinafter referred to as the first-respondent-Society), filed Writ Petition No. 17420/87, as a public cause litigation, questioning the authority of the Bangalore Development Authority (for short 'the BDA') to make bulk allotment in favour of the appellant-Society. The aims and objects of the first-respondent-Society are to take such measures for the development of classes mentioned in its name and to make such endeavours and efforts to safeguard the interests of those classes, and such other activities aimed at the development of those classes in Karnataka. The Head Office of the first-respondent-Society is in Kasturbanagar and its activities consist of safeguarding the rights of persons of the said classes and to ensure that the statutory authorities and other auth...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1991(62)FLR718]; ILR1991KAR946
K.A. Swami, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the order dated March 11, 1985, passed in W.P. No. 8398 of 1984. The appellants herein were respondents 1 to 3 and respondents 1 and 2 herein were the petitioners in the writ petition. In this appeal, the appellants will be referred to as respondents 1 to 3 and respondents 1 and 2 as petitioners. 2. In the writ petition, the petitioners have sought for quashing the orders dated March 31, 1984, passed by the first respondent on Claim Application Nos. MW 92 of 1983 and MW 93 of 1983 (Annexure-H). Those application were filed by the Labour Enforcement Officer (respondent 2) before the 1st respondent under sub-section (3) of Section 20 of the Minimum Wages, Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Enforcement Officer claimed that the wages paid by the petitioner to workmen employed for construction of staff quarters for Railway Administration at Puttenahalli, Yelahanka Hoble, were not in conformity with the notification issued ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1992Kant79; ILR1990KAR1064
ORDER1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the expulsion order passed on 25-8-1989 by the second respondent against him and has questioned the validity of the said order. The material facts are as follows:--The petitioner is a student of Final Year B.Com., in Shri Dhavala College, Mudibidri. It is claimed that the petitioner hails from a respected family and that his father is a well-known and respected headmaster of Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School, Kalya in Karkala Taluk and that the student electorate of Shri Dhavala College, in recognition of the dynamic qualities of the petitioner as a student, elected him as Senate Representative from their college for the academic year 1988-89.2. On 12-7-1989, the Principal, Shri Dhavala College, Mudibidri served a show cause notice on the petitioner to which the petitioner submitted the reply dated 17-7-1989. The show cause notice is reproduced below:Sri Dhavala College (Sponsored by Shree Moodbidri DigamberJain Vidyavardhaka Sangha(Regd.) Moo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1990KAR1456
ORDERBalakrishna, J 1. This Writ Petition is directed against Resolution No. 383 passed on 23-7-1984 by the Bangalore Development Authority ('the B.D.A.' for short) making a bulk allotment of an extent of 25 acres of land in Sy.Nos. 15 to 29, 31, 53 to 55 and 130 to respbndent-4 the Telecom Employees' Co-operative Housing Society Limited ('the Society' for short) and for quashing of letter dated 20-12-1984 addressed by the B.D.A. to the President of the Society calling upon the Society to remit the cost of the aforesaid 25 acres of land amounting to Rs. 31,25,000/- for taking further action in the matter of handing over the land in question to the Society.2. The petitioner has also sought for a Mandamus to the B.D.A. to notify the said 'lands for purpose of allotment to the public at large including the members of the class of persons falling within the purview of the petitioner Society and for disposal of the sites by allotment in accordance with the provisions of the Bangalore Develo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1990]67CompCas154(Kar); ILR1989KAR3135
1. The question which arises for consideration in this petition filed under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure (the code for short) is : Whether a 'firm of chartered accountants' is an 'establishment' within the meaning of the expression in section 2(i) of the karnataka shops and commercial Establishments Act, 1961 (Act No. 8 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1961). 2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are as below: Philipos and company is a registered partnership firm of chartered accountants, having its office at No. 12, Davis Road, Bangalore-560 084, post Box No. 8401. This partnership firm of chartered accountants (herein after referred to as the firm) is also registered under the chartered Accountants Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the ACt of 1949). Wg. Cdr. A Philipos (petitioner NO. 2). Ashok Kumar (petitioner No. 3), B. Satyanaryan (petitioner No. 4) and joseph Philipos (petitioner No. 5), chartered accountants, are the partners of the firm....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1990]67CompCas453a(Kar); 1989(3)KarLJ473; (1990)ILLJ227Kant
ORDER1. The question which arises for consideration in this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code' for short) is : Whether a 'Firm of Chartered Accountants' is an 'Establishment' within the meaning of the expression in Section 2(e) of the Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1961 (Act No. 8 of 1962). (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1961). 2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are as below. Phillipos & Company is a registered Partnership Firm of Chartered Accountants, having its office at No. 12, Davis Road, Bangalore-560084, Post Box No. 8401. The Partnership Firm of Chartered Accountants (hereinafter referred to as the Firm) is also registered under the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1949). Wg. Cdr. A. Phillipos (petitioner No. 2), Ashok Kumar (petitioner No. 3), B. Satyanaryan (petitioner No. 4) and Joseph Phillipos (petitioner No. 5) - the Chartered Accountants - are the partners...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1989KAR39
ORDERK.A. Swami, J 1. RELIEFS: .These petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking various reliefs. The reliefs sought for in W.P.Nos. 8546 to 8548/88 also cover the reliefs sought for in W.P.No. 15377/88. Therefore, the reliefs sought for in W.P.No. 15377/88 are not specifically stated. Further in a public interest petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the reliefs can be moulded according to the findings arrived at. The objection as to absence of a specific prayer in a public interest petition as in a private interest litigation does nor assume any importance. The reliefs sought for in W.P.Nos. 8546 to 8548/88 as follows:'Wherefore, the petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue:a) A writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take action for forfeiture of the land for contravention of Section 79 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act;b) A writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to acquire the land for the purpose...
Tag this Judgment!