Kerala Court June 1957 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Vittaldas Moonji Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-26-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Ker83; [1958]33ITR222(Ker)
M.S. Menon, J. 1. This is a petition under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for requiring the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Madras Bench)to state a case and refer the same to this, court. The assessment year concerned is 1950-51 (accounting period: year ending 31-3-1950) and the questions of law which according to the petitioner arise out of the order of the Appellate Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 582 of 1955-56 are:(1) Whether in the circumstances of the case there was any material for holding that a sum of Rs. 30,000 out of Rs. 60.000 invested in the partnership business started by the assessee's sons on 18-8-48 was income received by the asses-see from undisclosed sources in the accounting year ended 31-3-50? (2) whether there was no onus on the Income-tax Department to show that there were some source from which the assessee could make this income during the period of 41/2 months '.2. The second question was not specified in the petitioner's application to the Appellat...
themmalapuram Bus Transport Ltd. Vs. the Regional Transport Officer, M ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-26-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Ker142
ORDERM.S. Menon, J. 1. Sri Themmalapuram Bus Transport Ltd., Palghat, is the petitioner before me. The Secretary Regional Transport Authority, Malabar, (1st respondent) suspended the permit of a bus belonging to the company by Ext A dated 21-9-1955. The order reads as follows:'It was reported in the report of the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kollengode, dated 14-3-55 that on 12-3-55 at B-30 P.M. at Koduvayar Bazaar, when the bus MDM 5161 was checked by the S.-I. of Police Kollengode, he found carrying an overload of 9 adult passengers in it. As this was violation of one of the conditions of the permit, the operator was called on, in this office charge Memo No. 7809/B3/55 dated 18-4-55 to show cause as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him under Section 60 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The operator in his explanation dated 30-4-55 states that the bus had carried only the correct load, and that when the Sub-Inspector of Police cheked the bus at Koduvayar bazaar, he co...
Pulikal Estates Ltd. Vs. K. Jacob Thomas
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-26-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Ker180
ORDERVaradaraja Iyengar, J.1. This is an application by the PulikalEstates, who are assiganees of particular properties of the Respondent Company for deterring its dissolution for reasons mentioned. On earner occasions such relief had been granted for periods limited but the necessity arose for further deterring of the dissotution and hence this application. The Registrar of joint Stock Companies to whom notice was issued on the earlier applications had no objection to the allowing of the petitions but latterly he objected on ground that the court had no jurisdiction to consider the petition because more than 3 months had elapsed since the registration by him of the accounts and returns submitted by the Liquidator and the Company must be deemed to have become dissolved long before the application for deferring dissolution was ever made.This objection was however overruled by orderof the Kotiayam District Court--vide Order dated 8-6-1956 particularly in view of the previous stand taken ...
State of Kerala Vs. Madhavan Pillai
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Ker80; 1958CriLJ513
Raman Nayar, J.1. The accused in this case was charged with the murder of his wife, with causing hurt to his child aged a year and a half, and with attempting to commit suicide. The learned Sessions Judge found that the accused did commit the acts alleged but, nevertheless, acquitted him on ground that 'he was, at the time of the commission of the acts, by reason of unsoundness of mind incapable of knowing the nature of the acts or that he was doing what was wrong or contrary to law; In other words on the ground of the general exception embodied in Section 84, I.P.C. Against this acquittal the State has appealed.2. The accused, the deceased and their four children (the youngest of them being the victim of the hurt) were living together. The accused's father also was an inmate of the house, but at the time of the occurrence, which took place on the morning of the 4th December, 1955, he was away and the accused and the deceased and their Jour children were the only persons in the house. ...
K.S. Govinda Pillai Vs. District Collector, Quilon and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Ker152
M.S. Menon, J.1. This petition was filed on 28-3-1956. The petitioner died on 14-11-1956 and his brother was brought on record as per the order da'ed 11-3-1957 On C. M. P. No. 178 of 1957. The respondents did not object to that petition being allowed and the order was: 'Not opposed. Allowed''.2. The first respondent is the District Collector, Quilon, and the second, the State of Travancore-Cochin represented by its Chief Secretary. The prayer in tha petition is that this court sbould:'call for the records in Land Acquisition Case No. 585 of 1955 on the file of the first respondent and issue an order, direction or writ in the nature of certiorari and mandamus quashing the order D. Dis. No. 3976/56/L. A., dated 14-3-1956 (the original of Ext. A) of the first respondent and directingthe first respondent to make a reference in accordance with Ss. 18 and 19 of the Land Acquisition Act. XI/1089 to the District Judge, Quilen with all costs'.3. In the application filed before the first res- po...
Mammootty Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-17-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Ker4; 1958CriLJ31
Raman Nayar, J.1. The appellant, who was the 1st accused at the trial, has been convicted under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment tor three years. His fellow accused, accused 2 and 3, who were charged with abetment of this offence have been acquitted, and against their acquittal no appeal has been preferred. We might therefore ignore them altogether.2. P. W. 1, the alleged victim, a married Hindu girl of the Karuvan community, was living under the care and protection of her parents, P. Ws. 3 and 4, in the village of Tholpatti in the Wynad Taluk where they had settled. According to the prosecution, she was, at the time of the occurrence, just below the age of 17. The appellant, a Muslim bachelor of Kadambur near Cannanore, aged about 22, was running a small shop at Tholpatti within about 25 or 30 feet of P. W. 1's house and was living in the same building.He and P. W. 1 became acquainted, and in the absence of her parents and of her uncle...
General Produce Ltd. Vs. Ambalapuzha Talak Headload Conveyance Workers ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-13-1957
Reported in: (1957)IILLJ447Ker
M.S. Menon, J.1. Exhibit A is an award of the industrial tribunal, Alleppey, dated 15 November 1956, in a dispute between the petitioner-the General Produce, Ltd., Alleppey-and its workmen. One of the directions in the award is that the workmen concerned should be paid wages in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The contention of the petitioner is that the award in so far as it directs payment of retrenchment compensation has to be quashed by an appropriate writ or direction in that behalf.2. On 29 July 1954 the petitioner issued a notice to the effect that it was closing its business on account of financial losses and that the services of the workmen will not be required with effect from 30 July 1954. The petitioner repeated the contention that the closure was for financial reasons before the tribunal and urged that such a closure did not attract the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The tr...
Chathu Vs. P. Govindan Kutty
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Ker121; 1958CriLJ637
Koshi, C.J.1. This is a complainant's appeal, with special leave obtained from this Court under Section 417(3), Criminal Procedure Code, against an order of acquittal. In C. C. No. 233 of 1.956 on the file of the Additional First Class Magistrate (Judicial), Kozhik-kode, the appellant before this Court launched a prosecution against the respondent herein for kidnapping from his lawful guardianship his daughter, a girl 17 years and 5 months old. The occurrence was alleged to have taken place on the morning of 11-7-1956 at about 8 A.M., but the complaint was filed only on 1-9-1956. On 11-7-1956 itself the appellant informed the Police that his minor daughter who was living with him in his house had disappeared firm there and that her whereabouts remained unknown. When information reached him a week or so afterwards that the girl was living with the respondent in his house, a proper complaint was also lodged. The police registered a case against the respondent under Section 366, I. P. C.,...
Mohammed Kunju Abdul Kadir Vs. the Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-10-1957
Reported in: [1957]8STC689(Ker)
M.S. Menon, J. 1. The petitioner, a dealer in tobacco-'A' Licensee-was assessed to sales tax for the assessment year 1952-53 on a net turnover of Rs. 3,30,253-11-0 and directed to pay a sales tax of Rs. 28,850-10-3. The said turnover was inclusive of a sum of Rs. 77,555-7-0 which represented the excise duty payable to the Central Government by the Warehouse Licensee and which he collected from the petitioner when he sold the goods to him.2. The only question for decision in this petition is whether the petitioner is entitled to have the said sum deducted in calculating his net taxable turnover. The provision which is invoked in support of the contention is Rule 7 (1)(i) of the Travancore-Cochin General Sales Tax Rules, 1950, which provides that in determining the net turnover 'the excise duty, if any, paid by the dealer to...the Central Government in respect of the goods sold by him' shall be deducted from his gross turnover.3. It is impossible to say that the sum of Rs. 77,555-7-0 pai...
Narayanan Nambudiri Vs. Kurichithanam Educational Society
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-07-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Ker379
ORDERSankaran, J. 1. The first defendant in O. S. 188/56 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Meenachil has filed this revision petition challenging the validity of the order passed by that Court permitting the plaintiff to continue the suit as a representative suit under Order 1, Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Such a sanction was applied for sometime after the presentation of the plaint. One of the objections raised to the grant of the permission sought for by the plaintiff is that the permission should have been obtained in the first instance and the suit should have been instituted only after obtaining such permission or sanction. There is not much force in this objection. The sanction contemplated by Order 1, Rule 8 could be given even after the presentation of the plaint. There is provision in Rule 8 itself for giving notice of such sanction to all persons interested in the suit in such a manner as may be directed by the Court. The suit will be deemed to be repres...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »