Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-24-1999
Reported in : ILR1999KAR1961; 1999(5)KarLJ1
Y. Bhaskar Rao, C.J. 1. The Medical Council of India (hereinafter, for short, 'MCI') has filed this appeal assailing the judgment of the learned Single Judge disposing of the writ petition filed by respondent 1-college with certain directions.2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent 1-college was started in the year 1963-64. In the year 1985-86 the college had increased the seats up to 130 and the same was approved by the MCI. Thereafterwards, up to 1-6-1992 the seats in the college were increased from 130 to 175 and 175 to 195. The college had applied for approval of the said 195 seats to the MCI. An inspection was made on behalf of the MCI regarding the infrastructure of the college and they had suggested for remedying the defects pointed out by them, by upgrading the standards according to the norms provided by the MCI. Thereafter, further inspections were made and the Inspectors of the MCI inspected the college and gave the report, stating that the college has got all the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Feb-11-1999
Reported in : 1999(65)ECC42; 1999(111)ELT327(Kar); ILR1999KAR1877; 1999(3)KarLJ439
ORDER1. Common questions of law arise for consideration in these petitions, which were heard together and shall stand disposed of by this order. The questions primarily relate to a true and correct interpretation of Notification No. 64 of 1988, dated 1st of March, 1998 issued by the Central Government in exercise of its powers under Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 and the eligibility of the petitioners for the grant of exemption from payment of customs duty on the import of medical equipments from outside the country. The correctness of the orders passed by the respondents on the applications made by the petitioners for the grant of exemption certificates and the withdrawal of certificates alreadygranted has been assailed on a variety of grounds. The challenge arises against the following backdrop.-2. People's Union of Civil Liberties in a writ petition filed in public interest before the High Court of Delhi made serious allegations about what it described as a financial scam invol...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jul-05-1999
Reported in : AIR1999Kant483; ILR2000KAR63
ORDERG.C. Bharuka, J. 1. The petitioner is a medical college. It conducts the courses for under-graduate as well as post-graduate students in the faculty ofmedical science. In the present writ petition, the college desires quashing of letter dated 1 -9-1997 (Annexure 'K') issued by the respondent-Medical Council of India (in short, 'the MCI') by which the admission capacity of the college in respect of post-graduate courses for the academic year 1996-97 has been fixed. The petitioner-college has also questioned the consequential order dated 22-1-1997 (Annexure 'J') passed by the respondent-University by which the petitioner-college has been directed to discharge the students who have been admitted in excess of intake fixed by the MCI. There is a further prayer to regularise the admissions made in excess of the admission capacity so fixed by the MCI. The Genesis : 2. Indiscriminate admissions in professional Colleges without having any regard to the infrastructure requirements prescribe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Nov-11-1999
Reported in : 2000(1)KarLJ645
ORDER1. The petitioners, in these petitions, have called in question the correctness of the order dated 30th of March, 1999, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure-L, passed by the Land Tribunal, Bangalore South Taluk, Bangalore, rejecting their claim for conferment of occupancy right in respect of the land measuring 26 acres 29 guntas in Survey Nos. 72, 73, 74, 75, 82 and 83 of Chikkayellur Village, Tavarekere Hobli, Magadi Taluk, Bangalore Rural District.2. A few facts that may be relevant for the disposal of these petitions, may be stated as hereunder:(a) Lands bearing Survey Nos. 72, 73, 74, 75, 82 and 83 in all measuring 26 acres 29 guntas were agreed to be sold by one Basavayya @ Basavegouda in favour of one Hanumayya by means of an agreement to sell dated 10th of February, 1966. Since the said Basavayya did not perform his part of the obligation by executing the necessary sale deed, the said Hanumayya filed suit O.S. No. 39 of 1969, on the file of the Court of Principal C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Oct-27-1999
Reported in : 2000(1)KarLJ34
ORDER1. This review petition, from the order dated 20-3-1997 delivered by Hon'ble Mr. S. Rajendra Babu, J. and Hon'ble Mr. B.S. Sreenivasa Rao,J., in W.A. Nos. 1375 and 1376 of 1995, has been filed under Order 47. Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. We have heard Sri Shivaram Bhat, learned Counsel for the applicants/petitioners.3. This Court dismissed the appeals and passed the order 'that as respondent 2 is stated to have died on 6-10-1995, appeal had abated as against respondent 2. The contesting respondent having died, but legal representatives not having been brought on record. The matter having abated no relief can be granted to the appellants. Hence, the appeals are 'Dismissed'.' It is against this order, the review application has been filed.4. The learned Counsel for the applicant/petitioners submitted that the provisions of Order 22 do not apply to the writ proceedings or writ appeal so order impugned suffers from error of law apparent on record and made reference to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Feb-19-1999
Reported in : II(2000)ACC429; 2001ACJ2141
A.J. Sadashiva, J.1. Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in O.S. No. 195 of 1983 on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge, Mangalore, have filed this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 29.10.1988 passed therein awarding damages in a sum of Rs. 2,00,000 in respect of their alleged medical negligence.2. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are the plaintiff Nos. 1, 3 and 4 in the court below and respondent No. 4 was the defendant No. 3 joined as such at the application of the plaintiffs. Plaintiff No. 2, the victim of the negligence, died on 25.10.1985 during the pendency of the suit. For the sake of convenience, the parties to this appeal are hereinafter referred to with reference to their rank in the trial court.3. The undisputed facts leading to the judgment and decree under appeal are as follows:The deceased plaintiff No. 2 was the wife of the plaintiff No. 1 and the mother of plaintiff Nos. 3 and 4. She consulted the defendant No. 1 in respect of certain breathing problems and pain in the ne...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-15-1999
Reported in : 1999LC467(Karnataka); 2000(115)ELT615(Kar); ILR1999KAR2353; 2000(2)KarLJ62
ORDER1. Validity of proviso to Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 have been assailed in this petition. Section 35 provides the appeal to be filed within a period of three months and the proviso further provides a period of another three months for condonation of delay. If the appeal is filed after the expiry of 6 months then the Appellate Authority has nopower to condone the delay, therefore it is contended that it is arbitrary exercise of power by the Parliament. It is stated that there may be number of circumstances by which an assessee is prevented from filing the appeal and taking away his right to file an appeal is violative of the right of the petitioner to carry on his business as even the tax which is levied may be without the authority of law itself for which the petitioner would have no remedy.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner on the ground of condonation of delay relied on the following judgments;State of Kerala v E.K. Kuriyipe and Others: 'The sufficient case fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Apr-16-1999
Reported in : ILR1999KAR2648; 1999(3)KarLJ99
ORDER1. Appointments on compassionate grounds in the Civil Services of the State of Karnataka are governed by what are known as Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996 framed under Section 8 of Karnataka State Civil Services Act, 1978. The rules permit such appointments in favour of the dependents of a deceased Government servant subject to the fulfillment of the conditions stipulated for the purpose. One of the conditions prescribed is that the family of the deceased Government servant is facing financial crisis or destitution. Rule 5 of the rules requires that every dependent of a deceased Government servant seeking appointment on compassionate grounds shall make an application to the Head of the Department in which the deceased was serving within one year from the date of the death of the Government servant in such form as may be notified. In the case of minor dependents, the proviso to the rule permits an application within one year after he/she ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-01-1999
Reported in : ILR1999KAR3009; 1999(5)KarLJ129
ORDER1. This revision is preferred by the Board of Management of a Registered Education Society named Shri Veerabhadreshwar Education Society, Humnabad of Bidar District (hereinafter referred to as the management') challenging the judgment dated 29-9-1997 of the learned II Additional District Judge-cum-the Educational Appellate Tribunal at Gulbarga ('the Tribunal' for short) pronounced in appeal in KPEA No. 13 of 1994 of respondent 1-B.S. Shirol (hereinafter referred to as 'the delinquent') allowing the same and setting aside the order dated 11-4-1989 of the management which was made dismissing the delinquent from the service as Principal of its S.B.C. Arts and S.V. Commerce College (in short 'the College').2. The petitioner-society is a registered Educational Society. It has been running certain educational institutes including the said college. The Private Educational Institutions run under the auspices of the Society were governed by the provisions of the Karnataka Private Education...
Tag this Judgment!