Kerala Court March 1961 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.
Anantha Mallan Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax. Velayudhan ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-03-1961
Reported in: [1963]47ITR93(Ker)
ANSARI C.J. - The common question raised by these two writ petitions is, whether the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax can decide, under section 34 of the Agricultural Income-tax Act (XXII of 1950), hereafter referred to as the Act, the objections he himself has raised against the appellate judgments of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner The two petitioners seek to vacate different orders; but the issue raised in each is similar and, therefore, the petitions have been consolidated for the purposes of deciding the issue.The facts in O. P. 1088/59, are that the writ petitioner had been assessed to tax on income from properties belonging to his family, which the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Alleppey, had found for the assessment year 1957-58, to be Rs. 4,135. The petitioner claiming to be the son, who had been recently called upon due to his fathers death in December, 1955, to manage the properties, appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, T...
Thomas Ben Vs. Parvathy Ommini
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-02-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker16
ORDERT.C. Raghavan, J.1. The 5th defendant in a suit, which was stayed under Act I of 1957, is ths petitioner in the Civil Revision Petition and the revision arises out of an application by the plaintiff in the suit for injunction restraining the defendants from constructing any building in the suit property. Before the trial court the 5th defendant gave an undertaking that the building he was constructing would he removed without raising any claim for compensation in case the plaintiffs established their claim to recover possession of the property and the learned Munsiff on the basis of this undertaking dismissed the petition for injunction. The plaintiffs took up the matter in appeal to ihe lower appellate court, which reversed the decision of the trial court and issued an injunction restraining the 5th defendant from putting up a building in the property pending suit. The 5th defendant questions the correctness of this decision of the lower appellate court.2. The lower appellate cou...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›