Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jan-10-1983
Reported in : (1983)IILLJ330Kant
..... apposite. in that case constitutional validity of art. 31c introduced by section of the constitution (25th amendment) act which in express terms said that declaration made by the concerned legislature to the effect that an act enacted by it was intended to give effect to the directive principles enshrined in art. 39(b) and (c) of the constitution, upon which the law would ..... they so desire, to hold a regular enquiry into the misconduct alleged against the petitioners, in accordance with law. (iv) no costs. 29. immediately after i pronounced order in the above petitions, the learned counsel for the respondents made an application under art. 134 ..... case under the exception at all. similar would be the position if the reasons recorded are patently untenable or fanciful and have no nexus to the dispensing with the enquiry. it is well settled that an act or an order made without complying with the mandatory requirement, prescribed by law, is invalid ..... (b) not only the importance attached to the security of tenure guaranteed to civil servants under art. 311(2) in public interest as a rule but also the public interest intended to be protected by the exceptions incorporated in cls. (b) and (c) of the second proviso to art ..... interest of the security of the state.' it is well settled that rules of natural justice do not supplant the law but supplement it. (see a. k. kraipak v. union of india) : [1970]1scr457 . on this aspect the supreme court in the case of union of india v. j. n. sinha [1970-ii .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Apr-22-1983
Reported in : AIR1984Kant162; 1984(2)KarLJ218
Rama Jois, J. 1. These three appeals arise out of a common order, in W. P. Nos. 157, 158 and 212 of 1972, in which the constitutional validity of S. 101 of the City of Bangalore Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (the Act' for short), which took away the exemption from payment of property-tax in respect of buildings and lands exclusively used for educational Purposes by educational institution not receiving grant-in-aid from the Government, had been challenged, but was rejected by the learned single Judge.2. (i) The material facts, which are not in dispute, are as follow:- The appeal in W. A. No. 210/74 is by Baldwin Girls, High School, Bangalore; the appeal W. A. No. 211/74 is by Baldwin Boys' High School, Bangalore; and the appeal in W. A. No. 253 of 1974 is by Cluny Convent High School, Bangalore.(ii) The buildings owned by the management of the three high schools are exclusively used for educational purposes. The schools have been recognised by the Education Department of the State Go...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : May-30-1983
Reported in : [1984]148ITR774(KAR); [1984]148ITR774(Karn); [1983]15TAXMAN438(Kar)
Puttaswamy, J. 1. M/s. Citizen Watches Company Ltd., Japan (hereinafter referred to as 'Citizen'), a company incorporated in the highly industrialised Japan under the laws of that country, with its registered office situated on 20th Floor, Shinjuku Mitsui Building, 1-1-2 Chome Nissi Shinjuku, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, a world leader in the manufacture of wrist watches, is the common petitioner in these cases. 2. Before India attained independence and thereafter wrist-watches manufacturing industry in the country was not well developed. With the avowed object of establishing wrist-watches industry on a firm footing in public sector, to sarve the ever growing demands for wrist-watches in the country, Government of India (hereinafter referred to as 'Government') in the later part of 1959, through its accredited representatives negotiated with the Citizen to provide the technical know-how for establishing a modern wrist-watch manufacturing industry in the country. After protracted and delicate n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jan-12-1983
Reported in : AIR1984Kant122; 1983(1)KarLJ452
1. This appeal by the defendant is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17-3-1975 passed by the District judge, South Kanara, Mangalore in R. A. No. 20 of 1972 on his file, allowing the appeal on setting aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 15-7-1972, passed by the Prl. Civil Judge, Mangalore, in O.S. No. 116 of 1970 on his file. dismissing the suit of the plaintiff.2. The plaintiff instituted a suit for recovery of Rs. 13,117-50 P. along with costs, and future interest. According to him.' he entered into an agreement of sale with the defendant as per Ext. P-1 on 21-8-1969. It was agreed by the defendant that the suit property would be sold to the plaintiff for Rs. 30,000/- within the time fixed that is within 31-10-1969. There were some stipulations between the parties and the defendant was to comply with certain conditions. The plaintiff averred that the defendant did not comply with those conditions and was not ready and willing to perform her part of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-23-1983
Reported in : AIR1983Kant193; 1986(23)ELT75(Kar)
ORDER1. Sri N. Nagamanickam Shetty of Mysore, petitioner No. 1 is a dealer in gold in accordance with a licence issued to him by the authority under the Gold Control Act, 1968 (Central Act 45 of 1968) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Sri Sambhaji Siddhu Jadhav of Mysore, petitioner No. 2 is a refiner in gold in accordance with a licence issued to him by the authority under the said Act.2. On 5-6-1973 the then Superintendent of Central Excise, Preventive, Mysore - M. Indulal Shah - (hereinafter referred to as the Superintendent) searched the residential and business premises of petitioner No. 2 with his staff and seized gold ornaments weighing 3,962.700 grams. At the said search and seizure and in the statement drawn up thereto, petitioner No. 1 claimed that he was the owner of the said ornaments.3. On 17-11-1973 the Collector of Central Excise Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the Collector) issued a show cause notice (Exhibit B) to the petitioners and two other persons called...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Apr-05-1983
Reported in : AIR1983Kant251
Chandrakantaraj URS, J.1. In all the above petitioners, the petitioners are aggrieved by the Government Order bearing No. ED/168/TGL/80 Bangalore dated 5th Sept., 1981. They have alleged that the said order is without legal competence, without jurisdiction and violative of the rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Arts. 19(1)(c), 19(1)(e) of the Constitution as well as Art. 14 and the right conferred by Art. 300-A of the Constitution. Several Counsel appearing for the different petitioners have addressed arguments while the learned Advocate-General has addressed arguments on behalf of the respondent- State. There are, in all 25 petitions. The petitioners are mostly societies registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, each represented by its President or in some cases by the members of the Governing Body. Two of the petitioners are Public Trusts and petitions are filed by the trusts as well as by the trustees.2. In the course of this order, a detailed referenc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Apr-21-1983
Reported in : ILR1984KAR539; (1984)IILLJ400Kant
ORDERBopanna, J. 1. The question for consideration in this case is whether the state Government has got the power under S. 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to make a reference after it had earlier refuse to make such a reference Admittedly the dispute was one under S. 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947). 2. The contention of the Petitioner is that in the light of the Ruling of this Court in Indian Telephones Industries Ltd. v. State of Karnataka and others, [1978-I L.L.J. 544], the State Government after refusing to make a reference at an earlier point of time is precluded from making a reference without hearing the parties to the dispute, since certain civil consequences flow from its earlier order refusing to make the reference. 3. Mr. Subba Rao, learned counsel appearing for the workman has maintained that the power of the State Government to make a reference under S. 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act is now well settled by the decision of the Sup...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : May-09-1983
Reported in : ILR1986KAR118
ORDERBopanna, J. 1. The petitioners have challenged the validity of the two notifications issued by the Government of Karnataka under the provisions of the Karnataka Relief Undertakings (Special Provisions) Act, 1977 (for short the Act) as also the resultant action taken by the second respondent Factory through its Managing Director seeking to take possession of the distillery leased to them by the said respondent under the lease deed executed in their favour on 3-10-1979. The first notification, dated 4 11-1981. produced as Annexure-A in the Writ Petition, was made under Section 3 of the Act declaring the second respondent-Factory 'with its distillery' as a relief undertaking for a period of two years. The second notification bearing the same date was made under Section 4(1)(b) of the Act by which the State Government had directed that the operation of all contracts, assurances of property and agreements, to which the second respondent-Factory with its distillery was a party remained ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jun-03-1983
Reported in : ILR1986KAR88
ORDERRama Jois, J.1. In this Writ Petition presented by a lady Teacher on the establishment of the High School under the management of the Hubli-Dharwar Municipal Corporation ('Corporation' for short) seeking for the issue of a direction to the Corporation to consider her case for promotion as Head-Mistress of the High School, the following question of law arises for consideration :'Whether a woman not belonging to Scheduled Caste by birth can be regarded as belonging to Scheduled Caste for purposes of reservation of posts made by the State in exercise of its power under Clause (4) of Article 16 of the Constitution ?2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows :i) The petitioner, by birth was a Christian by religion. She joined service as an Assistant Teacher on the establishment of the Lamington High School(Hubli)on 2-8-1976. Prior to that she had worked for a period of one month from 17-1-1973 to 15-2-1973 as Teacher in St. Joseph's School, Karwar and for a period of 8 months com...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jun-10-1983
Reported in : AIR1984Kant131
Sabhahit, J.1. This appeal by the respondent-wife is directed against the order dated 10-2-1981 passed by the Civil Judge, Kodagu at Madikeri in H.M.C. No. 14 of 1978 on his file decreeing the petition of the husband for divorce from the respondent-wife, under Section 13(i)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act. 2. The husband-petitioner married the respondent in the petition on 23-5-1969 at Madikeri. After the marriage, according to him, the wife resided with him a, Mathur till 31-12-1970. Thereafter she left the house of the petitioner from Mathur without his consent and against his wishes. She never cared to return thereafter. Qn 12-12-1972 when the petitioner-husband was not in the village, she came in a car and took away all her belongings. In spite of his efforts and persuasion, the respondent did riot come back to live with him as hi,; wife. Respondent instituted H. M. C. 3 of 1977 on the file of the Civil Judge, Kodagu, for restitution of conjugal rights. Thereafter he withdrew the said...
Tag this Judgment!