Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1990]79STC351(Kar)
K. Shivashankar Bhat, J. 1. The petitioner in all the revision petitioner was assessed under section 5(1) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ('the Act'), regarding the sale of articles called 'medicinal oxygen' and 'nitrous oxide' used for the purpose of anaesthesia, by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, for the years 1973-74 to 1976-77. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, however, invoked his power under section 21 of the Act and held that the classification was wrong and treated the oxygen as falling within entry 121 of the Second Schedule to the treated the Act. This order of the Deputy Commissioner was affirmed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. Hence these revision petitions. 2. The short question for consideration is, whether the oxygen called 'medicinal oxygen' falls within entry 121 of the Second Schedule The said entry reads as follows : 'Industrial gas, such as oxygen, Thirteen per cemt'.acetylene, nitrogen and the like.3. According to Sri S. G. Sund...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2001(78)ECC326; 2000LC19(Karnataka); ILR2002KAR2175; 2002(4)KarLJ107
ORDERG. Patribasavan Goud, J.1. Alleging evasion of payment of duty under the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 ('Act' for short) punishable under Sections 9(1) and 9-AA of the Act, respondent-Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise filed a complaint under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Special Court for Economic Offences, Bangalore on 27-7-1995 against M/s. India Tobacco Company Limited (TTC' for short) as the first accused and Ashok Bhatia, Director of ITC as the second accused. On the same day, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 9(1) and 9-AA of the Act and directed issuing of summons to the said two accused. A case was registered at CC No. 1227 of 1995. 2. In the very case CC No. 1227 of 1995 on 31-10-1995, respondent-complainant filed before the said learned Magistrate, what he termed 'supplementary complaint' under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code alleging commission of the very offences punishable un...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1959Kant139; AIR1959Mys139
ORDERA.R. Somnath Iyer, J.1. This is a revision petition presented by a tenant against whom an application had been made by a person who claimed to be his landlord for his eviction on the ground that he was in default in regard to arrears of rent payable by him. On 6-10-1956, an order was made in those proceedings ex parte, ordering the eviction of the tenant. The tenant, thereupon, made an application on October 15, 1956, for getting that ex parte order set aside. The allegation that he made was that on the date on which the ex parte order was made against him he was present in Court although his advocate could not be present on account of his illness as a result of which he was being treated on that date in a private nursing home. According to him, when the case was called earlier in the day, although the tenant appeared before the Court, the-landlord did not. The case was accordingly kept by and was never called although he was waiting in the verandah of the court-hall till 5 p. m. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2006(5)KarLJ140
ORDERH.V.G. Ramesh, J.1. HRRP 511/2002 arises out of the order passed by the 19th Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore in HRC 1506/1997. HRRP 567/1999 arises out of the order passed by the Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore in HRC 1500/1997.2. HRC 1506/1997 was filed by the petitioner landlady seeking for possession of the petition shop premises beating No. 1 comprised in premises No. 283, 7th Cross, 1st Main Road, K N Extension, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore 22, for her bonafide use and occupation for commencement of business. According to the petitioner, the petition premises was let out on a monthly rent of Rs. 300/- during the year 1970 for the purpose of running a General Stores by the tenant. According to the petitioner, the schedule shop premises and also other shop premises bearing Nos. 2 to 5 comprised in the property bearing No. 283 are adjacent to each other. The petitioner's husband has retired from service and her son has studied BBM and they intend to start a departmental store...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1996Kant26; ILR1995KAR2073; 1995(3)KarLJ531
1. An inter-related though important facet of law touching the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and the Limitation Act has come up for decision in this appeal. Briefly stated, the controversy centres around the question as to whether the State which is obliged to make a reference to the Court under S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act in a case where an application for enhanced compensation has been filed, fails to do so for a considerable period of time, can thereafter object to the Court considering the reference on the ground that it is filed beyond the period of limitation. Though it would appear prima facie incongruous that the defaulting party namely the State should at all be permitted to object on the ground of limitation when that delay has occurred due to the default on the part of its own officers, and that, therefore, normally they should be estopped from canvassing any bar, the situation is far more complex because of certainprovisions of law and several judicial decisi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
W.P.No.10532/2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE13H DAY OF AUGUST, 2018 BEFORE R THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.10532/2008 (L-TER) BETWEEN: THE MANAGEMENT OF M/S HEWELET PACKARD INDIA SALES+ PRIVATE LIMITED NO.24, SALARPURIA ARENA ADUGODI, HOSUR MAIN ROAD BANGALORE-560 030 REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL COUNSEL MR. ASHOK UPADHYA PETITIONER (BY SRI K.R.ANAND, ADVOCATE) THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF LABOUR GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001 MR K.N.KUMAR S/O K.K.NAGARAJ NO.2/1, VENKATASWAMAPPA LANE CHIKKAMAVALI BANGALORE-560 004 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI A.C.BALARAJ, HCGP FOR R1; SRI T.NARAYANASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2) AND:1. 2. W.P.No.10532/2008 2 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER/POINTS OF DISPUTE ANNEXURE-A DT.5.7.2006 ISSUED BY THE R1 THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR NOW PENDING ADJUDICATION IN REFERENCE NO.34/2006. THIS WRIT PETITION, HAVING ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1989KAR768; 1987(3)KarLJ477
Bopanna, J.1. These appeals are directed against the common order of Rama Jois, J. in Writ Petitions 5320 of 1980 and other connected Writ Petitions disposed of on 11-4-1985. By that order the learned Judge dismissed the Writ Petitions of the Appellants/Petitioners on the ground that these are not fit cases for exercising the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. Appellants are all students who had taken their examinations in various subjects in the P.U.C. examination conducted by the Pre-University Board (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board') in the month of April, 1982. The results of the examination were announced in the month of June, 1982. Each of the appellants had failed in one or other subjects and consequently, they failed in the examination. After the results were announced, they invoked the provisions of Rule 38 of the Rules relating to Pre-University Examinations published by the State Government in Notification No. MED 119 UDC ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE12H DAY OF MARCH2015R PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.D.H.WAGHELA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.44828/2013 (GM-POL) BETWEEN M/S. DEVI ENTERPRISES # 96/A, BASAPPA REDDY COMPLEX Y V ANNAYA ROAD KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD YELACHENAHALLI BANGALORE-560078 REP BY ITS PROPRIETRIX SMT SUKADI DEVI ... PETITIONER (BY SRI SABARISH GANDHI, ADV., FOR SRI DEVARAJ .N, ADV.,) AND1 THE ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD (KSPCB) REGIONAL OFFICE- BANGALORE CITY SOUTH ZONE NISARGA BHAVAN7H D MAIN ROAD OPP. PUSHPANJALI THEATRE SHIVANAHALLI THIMMAIAH MAIN ROAD BANGALORE-560010 2 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER- ELECTRICALS BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY (BESCOM) S-5, SUB-DIVISION BESCOM LTD., ISRO LAYOUT BANGALORE-560078 3. THE CHAIRMAN4 BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD (BWSSB) K G ROAD, CAUVERY BHAVAN BANGALORE-560009 JOINT COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE (...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1951Kant72; AIR1951Mys72
Venkata Ramaiya, J.1. These are applns. filed under Article 226, Constitution of India, for issue of writs of certiorari calling for records & quashing the proceedings in Crim, case Nos. 1 & 2 of 1948. 49 on the file of the Ct. of the Sp. J, Tumhur & writs in the nature of habeas corpus directing the release of petnrs. from detention. The two cases referred to arise out of disturbances which occurred on 1-3-1949 in the shandy of Sira, a Town in Tumkur District, from a clash between Hindus & Muscleman's resulting in the death of a Jamedar, grievous hurt to a Police Inspector & injuries to others. It is alleged in the affidavits filed in support of the petns. that charge sheets for offences under Sections 302, 326, etc., I. P. C., were presented on 9-4-1949 in the Ct. of the Sp. First. Clasa Mag, Madhugiri, by the Police against the petnrs. that by a Notn dated 22 4-1949, the Govt. of Mysore constituted the Ct. of the Special J. Tumkur, under Section 2 of the Sp. Criminal Courts Act, 194...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1999(4)KarLJ189
1. Having failed in the departmental examination, S.A.S. Part-II held in the month of August 1991, the respondent-I herein filed a writ petition in this Court for issuance of appropriate directions to get his papers re-evaluated as he had expected more marks than awarded to him. During the pendency of the writ, answer paper No. IV pertaining to Commercial Accounting System and Internal Audit was got re-evaluated by the Examiner but the respondent 1 did not pass. On his prayer Sri Sadanand, Advocate, who had served as Deputy Accountant General before his retirement was appointed as a Commissioner/Evaluator and on the basis of his report the writ petitioner was declared to have passed the examination in the aforesaid paper vide the judgment impugned in this appeal.2. Some of the facts necessary to be noticed for disposal of the appeal are that the Karnataka Electricity Board has prescribed several departmental examinations for various categories of posts existing in the Electricity Board...
Tag this Judgment!