Kerala Court May 1960 Judgments
C. Balakrishnan Nambiar Vs. Narayani Pillayathiri Amma
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-27-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Ker40
C.A. Vaidialingam, J. 1. The point that arises for decision in this Second Appeal at the instance of the plaintiff in O. S. 912 of 19-19 is a pure question of limitation.2 The question is about the applicability or otherwise of Article 10 of the Indian Limitation Act. The further question is, if Article 10 applies, what as the starting point for the period of limitation prescribed in column 3 of Article 10. The trial court lias accepted the plaintiff's contention and come to the conclusion that there is no bar of limitation for the plaintiff's action; whereas the appellate court, on appeal, has differed from the conclusions arrived at by the trial court.The learned Sub-Judge has come to the conclusion that the plaintiff's suit O. S. 912 of 1949) is barred by limitation under the latter part of column 3 of Article 10 of the Limitation Act, and as such has held that the plaintiff's suit for preemption is barred.3. There was also a connected suit, tried along with the present suit O. S. 9...
Tag this Judgment!Paulose Varghese and ors. Vs. Balagangadara Thilak and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-27-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Ker172
Joseph, J. 1. The suit in which this appeal has been brought was one for a declaration that the sale in execution of the decree in O. S. No. 919 of 1111 of the District Munsiff's Court of Irinjalakuda was void and for recovery of possession of the property on payment of the mortgage money, for the realisation of which the said decree was obtained. The immoveable property which forms the subject-matter of the suit belonged to one Velayudhan Nail who executed a simple mortgage for Rs. 1000 In favour of the first defendant.The latter sued in O. S. No. 919 of 1111 for recovery of the mortgage money and obtained a decree. Velayudhan Nair applied for scaling down the debt under the Cochin Agriculturists Relief Act and the application was allowed. The decree-holder preferred an appeal and while the same was pending in the District Court, Velayudhan Nair died. His wile Karthiayini Amma and his children (Plaintiffs 1 to 4 and deceased Radha-krishnan) were impleaded as his legal representatives....
Tag this Judgment!CochIn Commercial Bank Ltd., CochIn Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ba ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-27-1960
Reported in: AIR1960Ker375
Ansari, C.J.1. The assesses, a public limited company, car-ries on banking business at Mattancherry, and its as sets include some Cochin Government Bonds, whose income are exempt from income, but not from Super or Corporation Tax. The assessee's 'previous years', its book profits for those years, the interest from the tax-free Bonds, the dividend declared in one such year, and the total income assessed by the Income-tax Officer, with the relevant assessment years, can best he shown in the tabular form given in the statement of the case sent to this Court:Previous year (Calendar year).Assessment year.Book profit.Interest on tax-free Cochin Govt. Bonds Included therein.Dividend declared.Total income assessed (Income-tax Officer.)19501951-5221,0187,4876,57519511952-5321,48612,1208,33019521953-5426,28118,81312,53222,954This reference arises in the assessment year 1953-54,and the details of Rs. 22,954/- the total incomefor the previous year, are: --Business ......RS. 2,927/-Interest on tax-...
Tag this Judgment!Executive Officer, Sri Padmanabhaswamy Temple Vs. Raghavan Pillai and ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-25-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Ker114
Anna Chandy, J.1. The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment in O.S. 45 of 1958 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Trivandrum. The suit was for arrears of salary and other emoluments. The plaintiff Raghavan Pillai was a Government Servant working as Melkankanakaran in the Sree Pandaravaka Department engaged in the collection of revenue. On 4-4-1951 the Government passed an order dismissing the plaintiff from service for misconduct.Against this order the plaintiff preferred O.P. 51 of 1952 before this court. This Court quashed the order of the Government for certain irregularities in the conduct of the enquiry and declared that the plaintiff was entitled to be treated by the Government as if the order of dismissal bad not been passed.The Government's appeal against this order was unsuccessful. The plaintiff then requested the Government to reinstate him in service and for payment of arrears of salary. The plaintiff attained the age of superannuation on 3-10-1955 and...
Tag this Judgment!Sait Nagjee Purushotham and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-1960
Reported in: AIR1960Ker364
Ansari, C.J.1. The assessee, Sait Nagjee Purushotham and Co., is a firm, and has been carrying piece-goods, banking, manufacture and sale of soaps as well as umbrellas business in Calicut, with branches elsewhere. In proceedings for the assessment years 1948-49 and 1949-50, the assessee has claimed relief under Section 25(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act; and the facts, on which the claim was made, may be briefly stated.2. On 6-12-1918, a partnership deed was executed between six persons, five being related, and the sixth being a stranger. The five partners, who were related, were Purushotham Amarsee Sait, Nagjee Amarsee Sait, Narayanjee Purushotham Sait, Krishnajee Purushotham Sait and Manacklal Purushotham Sait; and their relation can best be shown by the following pedigree: FATHER ___________________________|_________________________________ | | Purshotham Amarsee Salt Nagiee Amarsee Salt | | ___________|________________________ Jayanand Nagjee Sa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›