Kerala Court January 1963 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.
Sait Nagjee Purushotham and Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. Third Additional Income- ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-15-1963
Reported in: [1964]51ITR33(Ker)
In all these writ petitions, Mr. K. V. Surianarayana Iyer, learned counsel for the petitioner, who is the same, challenges the orders passed by the 3rd Additional Income-tax Officer, Kozhikode, dated February 21, 1961, under section 35 (10) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.The short contention that has been raised before me by Mr. Surianarayana Iyer in all these matters is that the provisions contained in section 35 (10) were enacted as and by way of a temporary measure and that on the date when these orders, under attack, were passed by the concerned officer, section 35 (10) had ceased to be in force, and, therefore, there was no jurisdiction in the officer concerned either to initiate proceedings under section 35 (10) or to pass any orders under section 35 (10). Section 35 (10) being, according to the learned counsel, a temporary measure, the provisions of section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, have no application.On the other hand, the contention of Mr. G. Rama Iyer, learned ...
R. Venkiteswaran Vs. A. Krishna Rao
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-14-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Ker166
ORDERT.C. Raghavan, J.1. The Civil Revision Petition raises a short but interesting question under the Indian succession Act. A person by name Bappu Yemuni of the Devadasi community died and on the strength of a wilt left by her the respondents obtained letters of administration from the District Court of Ernakutam. Another person by name Manakki, claiming to be a relation of the deceased on the ground that both of them were descendants of a common great grand mother, filed an application for revolting the letters of administration granted to the respondent, Pending that application Manakki died and the petitioner applied for substituting him as the legal representative of Manakki and permitting to continue the application for revocation of the letters of administration. This petition was dismissed by the District Court and the petitioner has come up in revision. 2. The learned District Judge has taken the view that the right to apply for letters of administration was a personal right ...
P. Govinda Menon Son of Lekshmi Amma and anr. Vs. Visalakshi Amma and ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-11-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ker99
Anna Chandy, J.1. This Appeal is by the defendants against the order dismissing their application under Order IX Rule 13, C. P. C. to have the ex pane decree passed against them set aside. The plaintiffs and the defendants are members of an undivided Naif larwad and the suit was for partition of and for recovery of the plaintitfs share in them. The appellants contested the suit on the ground that certain items of the schedule properties were not liable to be partitioned. They also contended that the plaintiffs were entitled only to a lesser share than what [hey claimed. Issues were raised and the plaintiff was examined on 2-9-1959. The case was then ad-jcurned to 22-9-1959 for the defendants' evidence. it was further adjourned to 21-10-1959 on the defendants' application. On 21-10-1959 the defendants were not present and there was no application for time on their behalf. Thereupon the arguments of the plaintiffs' counsel were heard and the case was adjourned to 23-10-1959 for disposal ...
V.K. Padmanabhan Vs. Kunjan Narayanan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-10-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ker97
M. Madhavan Nair, J. 1. This petition by the Official Liquidator of a Company is to revise an order dismissing his application to proceed with a suit ignoring its dismissal by the court of institution after the order for the winding up of the Company has been passed.2. O. S. No. 370 of 1955 on the file of the Munsif, Vaikom, is a suit for money instituted by the Company on the 30th June 1955. On the 5th November 1956, the Company was wound up by an order of the District Court, Alleppey; on the 5th December 1956 when the suit was called, the managing director submitted that fact before the Court and' thereupon the Court adjourned the case to the 31st January 1957, for the liquidator to get impleaded. As nothing was done, the suit was dismissed on the 30th January 1957. Nothing happened till the ,25th June 1958 when the liquidator submitted an application in the liquidation court stating that the dismissal of the suit by the Munsif, Vaikom. after the passing of the winding-up order, was ...
A.K.T.K.M. Sankaran Namboodiripad and ors. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-09-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Ker278
Govindan Nair, J.1. These twelve appeals are by the defendants in O. S. Nos. 66, 62, 124, 58, 59, 125, 61, 121, 126, 122, 123 and 60 of 1955 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge of Kozhikode. The respondent in all these appeals is the State of Kerala. The suits were instituted by the State against the several defendants in the suits for the amounts specified in the plaints. The suits have been decreed.2. The respondent in these appeals, the State of Kerala, alleged that the defendants in the various suits were appointed as their agents for the purchase of paddy, determined to be surplus to the requirements of producers in the delta area of West Godavari and Kistna Districts. In proof they relied on a notification dated 10-3-1948 issued by the Collector, West Godavari District, Ex. A-16. The schedule to Ext. A-16 mentioned the names of 22 such agents and the defendants in the suits mentioned above are 8, 9, 11, 13 to 18 and 20 to 22 mentioned in that schedule. A similar notifi...
Mulakkal Konan Ramakrishnan Vs. M.C. Batachandran Ezthuthassan, Counte ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-04-1963
Reported in: 1963CriLJ569
ORDERAnna Chandy, J.1. The revision petitioner lodged a complaint before the Second Class Magistrate, Trichur, against the respondent, the Head Constable of Valappad Police Station alleging offences under Sub-section 323, 324, 218 and 220, I.P.C. The allegations were that on 17th February 1960, the respondent arrested the complainant in connection with a case filed against him by one Velayi and Soman, took, him to the police station and beat him up. Some arrack was thrown on him and a false case under the Prohibition Act was charged against him. It is further alleged that to explain the injuries caused to the complainant as a result of the manhandling the Head Constable forced him to sign a false complaint against Velayi and Soman charging them of having caused hurt to him.2. The case was enquired into by the Second Class Magistrate, Trichur, who after examining a number of witnesses on both sides, framed charges-against the Head Constable under Section 323 and 218, I.P.C. The learned ...
Eliakutty and ors. Vs. Pudukkad Public Bank
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-01-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Ker195
M. Madhavan Nair, J.1. This appeal has exposed a strange process by which a plaintiff could forcibly realise his claim from a defendant before the suit came up for trial. The manoeuvre did not stop there. After that recovery the plaintiff collected the suit amount from another defendant in the suit and agreed to the dismissal of the suit as against the first mentioned defendant and resisted successfully a claim for refund of what has been admittedly taken twice over on the ground that the section of the Code is misquoted.2. The facts are thus: One K. R. Anthony issued a post-dated cheque to P. K. Anthony on the Cochin Nayar Bank Ltd., Puduhad branch. P. K. Anthony endorsed it in favour of the respondent-Bank and got it discounted by Nanappan Anthony who was then manager of the Bank. The cheque was dishonoured by the drawee Bank on presentation at maturity. The respondent Bank then filed O. S. No. 38 of 1122 on the file of the District Court, Anjikaimal (now Ema-kulam), against K. R. An...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›