Kerala Court August 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.
Standard Motor Union (Private) Ltd., Ettumanoor and anr. Vs. State of ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-16-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker298
C.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. The respective petitioners in these two petitions, challenge the validity of Section 12 of the Travancore-Cochin Vehicles Taxation Act, 1950, --Act XIV/1950 as well as a notification dated 28th April 1953 issued by the T. C. State Government directing the levy of tolls on vehicles using the bridge across the Meenachil river at Palai on the Ponkunnam-Lalam road.2. The petitioner in 0. P. 404/60, represented by the learned counsel Sri. P. Govindan Hair, states that the petitioner is engaged in the business of transport service and is an operator of stage carriage services, and inparticular, it is operating a stage carriage KLR 310 on the route from Palai to Vandanmada in the Kottayam District. The petitioner further avers that the said bus has to pass over the bridge at Palai, constructed on the Meenachil river, by the State Government. At the northernend of the bridge, a toll gate has been established by the State Government and it is leasing out annually the rig...
St. Josephs Provisions Stores Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, KeralA.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-16-1961
Reported in: [1962]45ITR380(Ker)
ANSARI C.J. - The assessee is a firm consisting of eight partners, which was constituted under the instrument of September 10, 1953, and the profit for the year ending March 31, 1957, amounted to Rs. 49,129. But on April 10, 1957, the following resolution was passed :'Due to the delay in getting the amount due from the customers it is found that financially the business suffers and as such the profits of the period as disclosed in the profit and loss account need not be divided and credited in the accounts of the partners and the same be kept as a reserve.'The individual accounts of the partners were accordingly not credited with their shares of the profit in the aforesaid year, and the amount was credited to the reserve account on April 10, 1957, at the same time narrating the share of each partner therein, which corresponds with the partners profit-sharing ratio under the deed of partnership. The firm applied for registration for the assessment year 1957-58, whose previous year would...
Narayanan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-12-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker81
ORDERP. Govinda Menon, J. 1. In Sessions Case No. 26/59 the accused who was charged for offences under Sections 457 and 380 read with Section 511 of the Indian-Penal Code was found guilty but convicted under Section 456, I. P. C., by the Assistant Sessions Judge of Tellicherry. In appeal to the Sessions Court, the learned Sessions Judge quashed the conviction and acquitted the accused. On a perusal of the calendar, notice was issued by this court to the accused to show cause why the acquittal should not be set aside.2. The facts material for the determination of the question raised in this case may be briefly stated:On the night of 15-5-1959 while Pw. 1 was sleeping on the verandah of his house he heard cries from inside the room where his wife was sleeping that a thief has entered the house. He woke up and found a person getting out of the door and running. He gave chase calling out 'thief, thief and at a place about 150 yards from his house the accused was apprehended. Pw. 3 and some...
Vasu Vs. Narayanan Nambooripad
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-12-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker261
ORDERT.C. Raghavan, J.1. The respondent in I. A. No. 4754 of 1961, on the file of the Court of the Additional Munsiff, Vaikom is the Civil Revision petitioner. The respondents before me filed O. S. No. 106 of 1961 for recovery of 1024 standard paras of paddy and 93 1/2 bundles of hay in kind or their value in money. They also filed I. A. No. 4754 of 1961 for attachment before judgment of a quantity of paddy in the possession of the Civil Revision Petitioner. The lower Court directed interim attachment and after hearing parties ordered the release of 400 paras of paddy to the plaintiffs. The lower court also directed that if the petitioner-defendant so desired, he could pay the value of the paddy at nirak rate and get the paddy released from attachment. It further directed the petitioner to file a statement showing the actual quantity of paddy required for cultivation purposes and also for the maintenance of himself, his wife and his minor dependents, observing that appropriate orders w...
Balkrishnan Nair Vs. Sulochana Amma
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-12-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ40
ORDERAnna Chandy, J.1. The Revision Petitioner is the respondent in a proceeding for maintenance under Section 488, Criminal Procedure Code, pending before the Malappuram Sub-Divisional Magistrate. He is a resident of Naduvattam and that is also the place where he last resided with his wife. As Naduvattam is within the territorial jurisdiction of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kozhikode, he contended that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Malappuram was not competent to conduct the proceedings. The Magistrate overruled the objection on the ground that since Malappuram as well as Kozhikode (? Naduvattam) are within the Kozhikode District, the petitioner is at liberty to move either of the Sub-Divisional Magistrates as per Section 488(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. The order of the learned Magistrate, is, I think, correct. Section 488(8) is that:'Proceedings' under this section may be taken against any person in any district where he resides or is, or where he last resided with his wi...
Krishnan Nair Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-12-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ340
ORDERP. Govinda Menon, J.1. This revision petition has been filed against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge of Quilon confirming the conviction and sentence passed on the accused By the Assistant Sessions Judge of Quilon in Sessions Case 14 of 1960.2. The accused was the defendant in O.S. 237/56 of the Pathanamthitta Munsiff's Court. The suit was filed on the foot of a promissory note executed by the accused. The accused denied execution of the promissory note, but the suit was decreed against the accused on 30.8.57.3. The accused obtained through his counsel a copy of the judgment for the purpose of filing an appeal 'and' the appeal was filed on 18.2.58. It was numbered as A.S. 47 of 1958. Later it was found out that the last sheet in the printed judgment produced along with the appeal memorandum had been changed and another sheet was attached to the judgment showing when the copy wag applied for and granted. The signature of the examiner who has to certify to the correctness...
Amalgamated Coffee Estates Ltd. Vs. State of KeralA.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-12-1961
Reported in: [1962]45ITR353(Ker)
M. S. MENON J. - This is an application by the Amalgamated Coffee Estates Limited, Sitharkunda, section 54(1) of the Madras Plantations Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955, questioning the correctness of the order the Agricultural Income-tax Appeal No. 34 of 1959. The assessment related to the assessment year 1956-57 (accounting period : April 1, 1955, to March 31, 1956).In the accounts of the applicant for the accounting year April 1, 1955, to March 31, 1956, a sum of Rs. 56,496 was shown as the excess received from the Coffee Board in respect of the season 1953-54. The contention of the department which has found favour with the Appellate Tribunal is that the said amount is assessable in the assessment year 1956-57.Sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Coffee Act, 1942, omitting the provisos thereto, reads as follows :'All coffee produced by a registered estate in excess of the amount specified in the internal sale quota allotted to the estate or when no internal sale quotas have been a...
Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Kerala Vs. Amalgamated Coffee ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-11-1961
Reported in: [1962]45ITR348(Ker)
M. S. MENON J. - This is an application by the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Kerala, under section 54(1) of the Madras Plantations Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955, questioning the correctness of the order of the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Trivandrum, in Agricultural Income-tax Appeal No. 33 of 1959. The assessee is the Amalgamated Coffee Estates Limited, Sitharkunda. The assessment related to the assessment year 1955-56.The Tribunal set aside the reassessment under section 35 of the Act on the ground that the notice issued under that section gave only a period of three days, that is, less than the minimum prescribed under section 16(2) of the Act. That fact, according to the Tribunal, made the reassessment an assessment without jurisdiction.Section 35 reads as follows :'If for any reason agricultural income chargeable to tax under this Act has escaped assessment in any financial year or has been assessed at too low a rate, the Agricultural Income-tax Offic...
Krishna Iyer Vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-11-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ662
ORDER (Dated 11-8-61) : Our order dated February 21, 1961, had decided certain points-which were raised at the time and the case which was adjourned for further hearing, has now been heard in full. The learned Counsel who now appeared for the petitioner, has pressed only two contentions, first that Section 178A of the Sea Customs Act, 1878, is unconstitutional as imposing an unreasonable restriction on the fundamental right under Article 19(1)(f) and (g) and second, that the confessional statement which was said to have of been made by the petitioner to Pw. 4 a Customs; Officer, is hit by the ban Under Section 25, and in any event, was not voluntary and is therefore irrelevant Under Section 24 of the Evidence Act.9. On the first contention, a Division 3enpb of the Madras High Court in : AIR1959Mad142 and a Single Judge of the Bombay High Court in : AIR1961Bom227 have held, that Section 178A imposes an unreasonable restriction on the fundamental right under Article 19(1)(f) and (g) and ...
Chakkuvarkey Vs. Devassy Kathanar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-08-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker104
M.S. Menon, J. 1. The decree-holder in O. S. No. 17 of 1121 of the Munsiff's Court of Perumbavoor filed an execution petition before that court on 17th January 1955 E. P. No. 36 of 1955. The petition was) dismissed by the Munsiff as barred by limitation and the dismissal has been confirmed by the Subordinate Judge of Parur in A. S. No. 199 of 1956. The decree-holder (execution petitioner) has preferred this second appeal.2. The decree in O. S. No. 17 of 1121 was passed on 11th August 1947. There was an appeal to the District Court of Parur, A. S. No. 2 of 1124. The District Court confirmed the decision of the Munsiff on 6th September 1950. The matter was then taken up before the High Court of Travancore-Cochin in S. A. No. 287 of 1951. The High Court dismissed the second appeal on 25th June 1951. The order of the High Court dismissing the second appeal reads as follows:'This second appeal coming on for admission upon pursuing the grounds of appeal, the decrees and judgments of the lowe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »