Kerala Court March 1959 Judgments
Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs. Industrial Tribunal, Trivandrum
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-31-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Ker326
M.S. Menon, J.1. The petitioner is the Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. whim owns and manages the Skinnerpuram Estate, Elamannur. The 1st respondent is the Industrial Tribunal, Trivandrum, the 2nd, the State of Kerala and the 3rd, 'the Staff Members of the Skinnerpuram Estate represented by the Estate Staff Union of South India, Kottayam'.2. The petitioner challenges the validity of the award of the Industrial Tribunal, Trivandrum, dated 31-1-1958, in Industrial Disputes No. 3 of 1955. One of the disputes referred for adjudication --the only dispute with which we are concerned--was :'Whether the dismissal of the following members of the staff is justifiable? If not to what reliefs are the employees entitled?' '1, Sri C.T. Thomas, Conductor. 2. Sri A.G. Cherian, Conductor. 3. Sri Joseph Mathe, Typist. 4. Kalis Pereira, Maistry. 5. Sri E-Ebey, Asst. Rubber-maker. 8. Sri C. Unnunny, Maistry. 7. SriP.M. Behanan, Maistry. 8. Sri P.C. Pappey, Watcher. 9. Sri Kunjukutty, Driver. 10. Sri T. Krishna...
Tag this Judgment!Moosa Vs. State and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-26-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker96
ORDERN. Varadaraja Iyengar, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution complaining against the acquisition by Government under the Land Acquisition Act, of 6 cents out of S. No. 56/2 in Badagara amsom in Kurumbranad Taluk belonging in jenm to the Kovilakarn of Kadathanat Valia Raja and outstanding on kanom Kuzhikanam with the petitioner.2. It appeared that Kannan, a Harijan was living in a hut inside the plot proposed to be acquired as lessee under the petitioner and on account of continuous non-payment of rent, proceedings by way of eviction had been taken against him on 11-8-1955. And because he still continued to occupy the premises, proceedings for trespass were started against him by the Police and he had to furnish security for good behaviour. Soon later the question of housing him was taken up by the Madras Government on the motion of the Director of Harijan Welfare and the decision was then taken of acquiring the plot here at Government expense, for the purpo...
Tag this Judgment!Gangadhara Menon Vs. P.S.N. Motors Ltd., Trichur
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-23-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker83
ORDERN. Varadaraja Iyengar, J.1. These two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution arise out of the grant of a Stage Carriage permit for the route Chalakudy Malayattur via Kalady by the 2nd respondent State Transport Appellate Tribunal in favour of the 1st Respondent P. S. N. Motors (Private) Ltd. The petitioner in O. P. 803/58 in one of the rival applicants, viz. Gangadhara Menon and the petitioner in O. P. 47 of 1959 is another rival applicant Messrs. Anamallais Bus Transports (Private) Ltd.2. The notification calling for applications for the route was dated 9-11-1955 and there were 10 applicants inclusive of the petitioners and the 1st respondent in O. P. 803 who is the 1st respondent in O. P. 47. On 5-5-1956 the R. T. A. preferred Gangadhara Menon as against all others. Vide Ex. R 1 order. The order was set aside by the Appellate Authority by Ex R 2 order dated 14-8-1956 on the ground that no reason was disclosed in Ex. R. 1. The RTA. passed fresh order Ex. R 3 on 31-1-57 a...
Tag this Judgment!Balakrishna Vs. the State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-23-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker149
Anna Chandy, J.1. This appeal and the reference for confirmation arise out of the sentence of death passed by the Sessions Judge of Trivandrum on the appellant Balakrishnan for having committed the murder of one Joseph Vaidyan on 14-8-1958 at about 8 P.M.2. The deceased Joseph Vaidyan alias Kuttan Vaidyan. a member of the Aryanad Panchayat, and the second accused Narayana Pillai were at logger heads for some time past due to civil and criminal litigation between them. At about 5 P.M. on 14-8-1958 Joseph Vaidyan went to the shop of P.W. 2 Anandan and sitting on the bench placed in front of the shop began to chew betal. At about 5-30 P.M. the second accused, Narayana Pillai also took his seat on the same bench and began to talk ill of the administration of the Aryanad Panchayat. and even went to the extent of saying that it has become necessary for them to conduct a 'Bhagavan Mackroni Kathaprasangam' to tone up the Panchayat administration.At about 7 P.M. the first accused arrived and as...
Tag this Judgment!Velu Gopalan Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-23-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Ker370; [1960]38ITR141(Ker)
M.S. Menon, J.1. The petitioner and one Krishnan entered into a partnership on the 15th April, 1949. The firm was registered under Section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.2. Ext. P.3 dated 5-6-1952 is the assessment order in respect of the assessment year 1951-52. In that order the Income-tax Officer stated as follows :'As the firm is registered there is no tax payable by it. The share income of each partner will be considered in his individual assessment. No demand for 1951-52'.3. The statement conformed to Section 23 (5) (a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which on the material date -- omitting the provisos thereto --was in the following terms :'Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing sub-sections, when the assessee is a firm and the total income of the firm has been assessed under Sub-section (1), Sub-section (3) or Sub-section (4), as the case may be. (a) in the case of a registered firm the sum payable by the firm itself shall not be determined but the total...
Tag this Judgment!S. Kumaraswami Reddiar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-20-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker9
Varadaraja Iyengar, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench. The question referred is :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, an addition of the sum of Rs. 25,856 having been made to the profits and gains of the business carried on by the assessee, the further addition of the sum of Rs. 17,402 representing the total of the credits in the books and deposits in the banks in the account year, is lawful'.The assessee, S. Kumaraswamy Reddiar, is a wholesale and also retail piecegoods merchant carrying on business at Alleppey and Quilon. In computing the profits on the assessee's business for the assessment year 1123 M.E. the Income-tax Officer found that the accounts maintained by the assessee were unreliable and the profits had therefore to be estimated. Accordingly he made an addition to the book version of the profits to the extent of Rs. 26,418 in respect of the Alleppey business ...
Tag this Judgment!S. Kumaraswami Reddiar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore, Travanc ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-20-1959
Reported in: [1960]40ITR590(Ker)
VARADARAJA IYENGAR, J. - This is a reference under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench. The question referred is :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, an addition of the sum of Rs. 25,836, having been made to the profits and gains of the business carried on by the assessee, the further addition of the sum of Rs. 17,402 representing the total of the credits in the books and deposits in the bank in the account year, is lawful ?'The assessee, S. Kumaraswamy Reddiar, is a wholesale and also retail piece-goods merchant carrying on business at Alleppey and Quilon. In computing the profits on the assessees business for the assessment year 1123 M.E., the Income-tax Officer found that the accounts maintained by the assessee were unreliable and the profits had therefore to be estimated. Accordingly he made an addition to the book version of the profits to the extent of Rs. 26,418 in respect of the Alleppey business...
Tag this Judgment!Raman Narayanan Vs. Chathunny
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-18-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker38
Varadarajan Iyengar, J.1. This Second Appeal is by the plaintiff whose suit for redemption after ignoring a prior decree and sale in execution following, of the equity, on ground of fraud has been dismissed concurrently by the courts below.2. The plaint schedule garden land 2 acres 67 cents in extent with a building thereon and situate in Mukundapuram Taluk belonged to the plaintiff. He first executed on 2-11-1105 Ext. C chitty hypothecation bond in favour of Edathuruthi Church securing the property for the payment of future subscriptions in a chitty. Later but in the same year he executed a simple mortgage over it in favour of the 3rd defendant for a sum of Rs. 400/-. He finally, on 13-6-1106 executed Ext. B usufructuary mortgage of the property in favour of the defendants 1 and 2, for a sum of Rs. 140/ pledging also by way of further security certain paid-up subscription in another chitty. Under the provisions of Ext. B the yearly income from the property was estimated at Rs. 120 and...
Tag this Judgment!Uthup Vs. Kurian Kathanar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-18-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker90
V. Iyengar, J.1. This appeal is by the defendant in a suit on a hypothecation bond which has been decreed by the court below after disallowing in entirety certain cross claims as also payments set up by him by way of partial discharge. We are concerned in this appeal with only five of these items disallowed: (i) Plaintiff's chitty subscriptions paid off by the defendant at plaintiffs request -- Rs. 920; (ii) rent due to the defendant by way of hire from the plaintiff for use of the defendant's car shed --Rs. 100; (iii) amount paid through D. W. 4 to the plaintiff -- Rs. 342; (iv)' amounts spent by the defendant in connection with the plaintiff's foreign trip -- Rs. 25; (v) amount spent by the defendant in connection with the theft of the plaintiff's car -- Rs. 107; and (vi) amount paid to the plaintiff on various occasions towards the plaint debt -- Rs. 937.2. Taking up the last of the items, viz., amounts paid on various occasions, for purpose of convenience, no receipt or voucher had...
Tag this Judgment!M. Alavi and anr. Vs. State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-18-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker94
Anna Chandy, J. 1. This appeal is by the plain tiff in O. S. 112 of 1955 on the file of the Subordinate. Judge, Kozhikode.2. The suit was for recovery of Rs. 25,213/- as damages on account of the breach of a contract with the defendant State for clear-felling an area of 28 acres in coupe No. 5 of Edacode Block in Nilambur Reserve Sorest, and for the return of Rs. 500/- being the advance deposit made for the contract. The advance amount was deposited in court and withdrawn by the plaintiff.3. The allegations, in the plaint, relevant for the disposal of the appeal, arc the following:'By a notice dated 12th October 1952, the District Forest Officer, Nilambur, had called for sealed tenders for the purchase of the right to cut and remove 1269 enumerated standing trees in coupe No. 5 of Edacode Block in Nilambur reserve forest and having an estimated volume of 44,500 Cubic feet. Tenderers were directed to quote an amount exceeding Rs. 40,700/- exclusive of sales-tax for all the timber that w...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »