Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Shri Kishore Kumar Sidhapur Nagaraj vs Smt Preethi

High Court Of Karnataka|18 December, 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.768 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
Shri. Kishore Kumar Sidhapur Nagaraj Aged about 43 years R/at No.H-1404, Nagarjuna Meadows Phase-2 Doddaballapura Main Road Yelahanka New Town Bengaluru-560 064 Mobile: +91-9742783646 …Petitioner (By Sri Kishore Kumar Sidhapur Nagaraj- (Petitioner-Party-in-Person)) AND:
Smt. Preethi Aged about 43 years R/at No.1030, 1st Main Road Opp. Wheel and Axle Plant Yelahanka New Town Benglauru-560 064 Res: 080-28565943, Mobile 1:+91-8147160682 (By Sri A.G.Bopaiah, Advocate-(Absent)) …Respondent This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C praying to set aside the order dated 12.06.2019 passed by LXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in the Criminal Appeal No.2216/2018 and also set aside the impugned order on Memo dated 06.09.2018, revised on 03.10.2018 in connection with the order dated 01.04.2016 by Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court-VI, Bengaluru in Crl.Misc.No.90/2015 and etc., This Criminal Revision Petition coming on for Admission, this day the Court made the following:-
O R D E R Heard the petitioner/party-in-person at length.
Learned counsel for the respondent is absent.
2. The main grievance of the petitioner/party-in- person is that the amounts collected under Annexures A6 and A7 are under dispute. It is his contention that actually his son is studying in Chethana PU college and the receipt produced at Annexure A6 pertains to Miranda Educational Society, which is not connected to his son. Further, in the receipt produced at Annexure A7, CGST and SGST have been collected at 9%. When a minor’s fee has been collected, as per Section 66B and D of the Finance Act, no service tax could be charged since it is not considered as service. Though, all these aspects have been brought to the notice of the Courts below, the same has not been considered.
3. It is the specific case of the petitioner/party-in- person that his son is not studying in Miranda Educational Society. Hence, the Court below is directed to consider the said submission and give a finding with regard to the said issue, at the time of final disposal of the case.
4. With the said liberty, petition is disposed of.
Registry is directed to send back the lower Court records forthwith.
Sd/- JUDGE bkp
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Judges
  • B A Patil