Kerala Court August 1958 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.
Haji P.K. Moidoo Bros. Vs. State of Madras
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-06-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ker29; [1959]10STC1(Ker)
Kumara Pillai, J.1. For the financial year 1951-52 the petitioners in this case, Haji P.K. Moidoo Bros., a firm doing business at Kozhikode, were assessed to sales-tax under the Madras General Sales Tax Act by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Kozhikode, on a net turnover of Rs. 11,44,346-15-1. This assessment was made by an order dated 17-3-1953, and from it the petitioners preferred an appeal, Appeal No. 31/53-54, to the Commercial Tax Officer, Malabar (South). After hearing the appeal and reserving orders thereon, on 27-11-1954 that officer issued to the petitioners a notice under Rule 17 (3-A) read with Rule 17 (1) of the Rules made by the Government of Madras under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939, for including in their assessment an alleged turnover of over six lakhs of rupees which, according to him, had escaped assessment.This amount is said to be the turnover in respect of certain transactions which the petitioners are alleged to have had with the Madura Sugars and All...
State Vs. Madhogaria
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-05-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ker200; 1959CriLJ717; (1959)IILLJ50Ker
Varadaraja Iyengar, J.1. This appeal is by the Public Prosecutor, on behalf of the State, against the judgment of acquittal dated 30-9-1957 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Alleppey in a complaint before him under the Factories Act 68 of 1948. 2. The accused is B. Madhogaria, Manager of the Firm of Tharachand Sivkumar at Alleppey, On 111-9-1956. at 1 P. M. the Inspector of Factories, Alleppey, visited the premises of the firm and there found 33 workers engaged in cutting and drying arecanuts and garbling pepper. This according to the Inspector constituted the conduct of a manufacturing process by 20 and more persons and so amounted to the running of a factory. And, as the accused had not registered his premises as a factory or obtained the requisite licence or permission and had not also given the due notices,' he was liable to he prosecuted for various offences under the Factories Act and the Rules thereunder. So he obtained permission dated 6-12-1936 from the Chief Inspector ...
R.M. Palat Vs. P.A. Nedungadi
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-05-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ker377
M.S. Menon, J.1. The petitioner was the 1st defendant in O. S. No. 16 of 1955 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Ottapalam. The suit was to recover a sum of Rs. 10,448-4-0, the principal and interest due on a promissory note executed by the 2nd defendant to the 1st and endorsed by him to the plaintiff.2. The suit was decreed with costs as prayed for, And the 1st defendant filed before this Court A. S. No. 172 of 1957. The appeal is still pending disposal.3. The 1st defendant also filed C. M. P. No, 987 of 1957 and prayed 'that the decree of the Subordinate Judge of Ottapalam in O. S. 16 of 1955 in the file of that Court be stayed pending disposal of the above appeal'. The order on the C. M. P. was .'Stay allowed only on proper security being furnished to the satisfaction of the lower Court within a reasonable time to be fixed by that Court'.4. Subsequently the petitioner filed an unregistered security bond dated 23-12-1957. The Subordinate Judge held that a registered bond was ne...
Kunju Moideen Methararu Vs. Kandan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-01-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ker146; 1959CriLJ588
Varadaraja Iyengar, J. 1. This appeal is by leave under Section 417(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, against the judgment of acquittal dated 9-12-1957 and passed by the Sub-Magisirate of Kottayam in C. C. No. 786 of 1953 on his file. 2. The matter arose on a private complaint, filed by the appellant against 6 accused viz., the 6 respondents herein. The complaint was for offences under Sections 447, 506(1), 352 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, in that the accused jointly trespassed into the complainant's compound known as Pungasserichira and constructed a hut there, in spite of his protests and by intimidating him by threat of physical injury. The first four accused constituted a family, being a father, mother and two sons. The 5th accused was a cousin of the 1st accused and the 6th accused was their well-wisher. The 1st accused was originally a tenant of the complainant in respect of this property and had been evicted therefrom on 8-12-1952 under decree in O. S.383 of 1950 of the Ko...
Subramonia Ayyar Vs. State of Travancore-cochIn and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-01-1958
Reported in: (1959)ILLJ376Ker
ORDERN. Varadaraja Ayyangar, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by N.P. Subramonia Ayyar who was a municipal commissioner in the service of the respondent 1, Travancore-Cochin State, and has, on the formation of Kerala State subsequent to the filing, opted for Madras. The complaint is in respect of the rank assigned to him as among the municipal commissioners in the State, in the gradation list as on 1 April 1953.2. The Travancore District Municipalities Act 23 of 1116 by Section 13(1) provided for appointment by Government of a commissioner for any municipality in the State. Prior to 1945 only four major municipalities of the Travancore State had commissioners so appointed and they were also all deputed from the State service. By Government order dated 19 September 1945, Government sanctioned the appointment of municipal commissioners for eleven more municipalities tentatively for a three years' period. Re-appointments were made in respect of all the c...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›