Kerala Court October 1963 Judgments
Jaganathan Vs. Sales Tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-31-1963
Reported in: [1964]15STC702(Ker)
P. Govindan Nair, J.1. Section 4 of the General Sales Tax Act, 1125 reads:4. Application of the Act.-The provisions of this Act shall not apply to the sale of electrical energy and any goods other than toddy, arrack and foreign liquor including Indian made foreign liquor on which duty is or may be levied under the Travancore or Cochin Abkari Act, or the Travancore-Cochin Prohibition Act, 1950, or the Madras Prohibition Act, 1937 as in force in the Malabar District referred to in Sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the States Re-organisation Act, 1956 or Travancore or Cochin Opium Act, or the Opium Act, 1878 (Central Act I of 1878).2. So spirituous medicinal preparations were not goods relating to which sales tax could be imposed under the General Sales Tax Act. The Cochin Abkari Act in so far as it imposes duty on spirituous medicinal preparations must be deemed to have been repealed by the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955. Section 21 of that Act provides :21. Re...
Tag this Judgment!K. George Vs. the State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-31-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ker238
1. The petitioner, Shri K. George, Advocate was a candidate for direct selection as a Munsiff in this State. The Kerala Public Service Commission considered him suitable, allotted him rank No. 13, and recommended his appointment.2. Ext.P-1 dated 30-10-1961 is the Memorandum issued to the petitioner by the Public Service Commission. It reads as follows:'Shri K. George is informed that he has been selected for recruitment as Munsiff on Rs. 300-700 per mensem in the Judicial Department. The selection is subject to satisfactory proof of health, whatever further checking Government may find it necessary to do. Further instructions will be issued to him in due course by the Department referred to in the paragraph above.' The petitioner, however, was not given an appointment by the State, even though candidates who were ranked lower than him by the Public 'Service Commission have been appointed and posted as Munsiff s.3. The notification issued by the Public Service Commission inviting applic...
Tag this Judgment!Ulahannan Job Vs. the Prudential Trust, Vaikom and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-29-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Ker16
P.T. Raman Nayar, J.1. I confess I am unable to understand the procedure which unfortunately still persists in the Travancore area of the State, of a judgment-debtor filing his objections to aa application for execution in the shape of an independent petition (which is numbered as a C. M. P.), of the Court deciding the merits of the execution petition on this petition by the judgment-debtor, and of appeals and second appeals being taken, as in this case, from an order upholding or rejecting the judgment-debtor's objection as if that were an order in execution answering the definition of a decree, whereas, the real order in execution is the consequential order, if any, made on the execution petition. However that might be, I am satisfied that even if we regard the appeal and the second appeal in this case as appeals from the order for arrest which has presumably beea passed in the execution petition consequent on the rejection of the appellant judgment-debtor's objection petition, this ...
Tag this Judgment!Antony, Choolakkal Vs. Excise Commissioner Board of Revenue, Trivandru ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-24-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Ker8
ORDERC.A. Vaidialingam, J. 1. In this writ petition, Mr. K. Raghavan Nair, learned counsel for the petitioner, seeks the issue of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents, not to interfere with the petitioner's trade in the retail sale of intoxicating liquor for want of a licence issued by the first respondent. The Excise Commissioner, Board of Revenue, Trivandrum, the Assistant Excise Commissioner, Ernakulam, and the State of Kerala, represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government, Trivandrum, are respondents 1 to 3 respectively in this writ petition.2. The petitioner is the proprietor of Hotel Airlines, Ernakulam. According to him, he has been conducting a bar for the retail sale of foreign and Indian made liquor from 1-4-1962, on the basis of a licence granted by the Excise Commissioner, Ext. P-1, under Section 15 of the Cochin Abkari Act, Act I of 1077 -- hereinafter referred to as the Act and the rules framed thereunder. The petitioner further states that on 30-3-1963, h...
Tag this Judgment!The Workmen of Pierce Leslie and Co. Ltd. Vs. the Labour Court, Quilon ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-23-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Ker171
ORDERC.A. Vaidialingam, J. 1. In this writ petition Mr. M. P. Menon, the learned counsel for the petitioner, challenges the award, of the Labour Court, Qullon in I. L). No. 36 of 1901 and published in the State Gazette dated 19-6-1962.2. The question that was referred to for adjudication by the labour Court, related to the dismissal of Sri Ramanathan by the Management concerned.3. It is not necessary to go into any great detail regarding the circumstances under which, according to the management, they took action against the workman concerned in this writ petition, because those aspects have not been gone into by the labour court.4. The action, by way of dismissal of the workman concerned, appears to have been taken on 13-10-1660; and it is the case of the Union, the petitioners in these proceedings, that they decided on 9-11-1930, to take up, or, so to say, to sponsor thecause of Mr. Ramanathan and to contact themanagement in respect of that matter.5. Ultimately the dispute Itself was...
Tag this Judgment!Bappu Rawther Abdul Kassim Rawther Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-21-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ker109
K.K. Mathew, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The suit was for recovery of damages. 5 acres and 24 cents of property in S. No. 303/1 belonged to one Kochukunhu. That property together with 57 cents in S. No. 15/2, was sold in one lot in revenue auction for arrears of Abkari dues due from the said Kochu Kunhu and it was purchased by the plaintiff. It was alleged that Kochu Kunhu had no title to S. No. 303/1 at the time of the revenue auction; and the suit was for recovery of the proportionate amount of the purchase money from the State, The defendant, the State of Kerala, contended that there was no warranty of title in a revenue sale, that the plaintiff was aware of the want of title of Kochu Kunhu to S. No. 303/1 and that the plaintiff was not entitled in any reliefs.2. The Court below found that there was no warranty of title in a revenue sale, and that the plaintiff was not entitled to any relief, for the reason that there was no total failure of consideration.3. The question fo...
Tag this Judgment!Thrikkandiyur Padinharekkara Kunjikutty Amma's son Gopala Menon Vs. Ka ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-21-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ker81
K.K. Mathew, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The suit was for redemption of Ext. A-1 mortgage dated 24-5-1889 executed by Krishna Menon, who was a karnaven of the tarwad or the plaintiff and defendants 26 to 28 to one Cheroti amma and 2 others for Rs. 1500/-. There was a partition among the mortgagees. Cherotti Amma's rights under the mortgage became vested in the 28th defendant and others. Defan-dants 1 to 16 are the legal representatives of the original mortgagees.2. The plaintiffs case was that he was entitled to redeem the mortgage as the karnavan of the tarwan, Sekhara Menon, assigned the right to redeem the mortgage to him and also on the ground that he was a co-owner of the property sought to be redeemed.3. The defendants contended that the plaintiff was incompetent to represent the tarwad and chim relief on behalf of the tarwad, that there was no assignment of the right to redeem by the karnavan as alleged, that the tarwan consisted of the descendants of one Ittirivu Amma ...
Tag this Judgment!Valanhiyil Kunhi Avulla and ors. Vs. Eengayil Peetikayil Kunhi Avulla ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-21-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ker200
Madhavan Nair, J. 1. The appellants are defendants i to 3 in a suit for partition.2. The plaint properties belonged to Mammad, who died on October 27, 1956. Defendants 1 to 3, and plaintiffs 1 and 2 are his children: On June 18, 1956, a deed of partition, Ext. 622, had been executed among Mammad and his children. Certain disputes 'regarding properties that stood in the name of the 1st defendant and his exertions for acquisitions in the name of Mammad' were settled by that deed and properties divided among defendants 1 to 3 and plaintiffs 1 and 2 with immediate effect. It was agreed therein that properties not included in the deed belonged absolutely to the persons in whose name they stood and that no other party would have any claim thereto. Clauses 6 and 7 of that deed (translated in English) recite as follows:'6...... It is resolved that properties not included herein but found is the name of any of us belong to such persons separately and that the others, among us shall not advance ...
Tag this Judgment!Pharmaceuticals and Chemicals (Travancore) Private Ltd., Trivandrum an ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-18-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Ker135
ORDERC.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. The petitioners, in these writ petitions, who are engaged in the manufacture and sale of all kinds of spirituous preparations besides Allopathic tinctures, challenge the right, of the State Government to collect fees for assaying the companies' products and the costs of the Excise establishment deputed to supervise the operations of the companies concerned.2. Mr. K.K. Menon, learned counsel appearing for all these petitions, as well as the learned Advocate General appearing for the State, the respondent in all these matters, have agreed to treat the pleadings in O. P. No. 1674 of 1962 as representing the stand taken by the various petitioners regarding their grounds of attack, against the levy in question, as well as the stand taken by the State Government, to justify the said levies. Therefore, I will refer to the averments in the pleadings in the said writ petition as well as the exhibits filed by the petitioner and the State Government in that matter.3. ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhargavi Amma Chellamma, Vilasathu Veedu Vs. the State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-11-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ker241; 1964CriLJ414
Anna Chandy, J. 1. This is an appeal filed against the judgment of the Alleppey Sessions Judge, convicting the appellant Chellamma under Section 302, I. P. C, and sentencing her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for causing the death of. her new born illegitimate child by burying it alive.2. Chellamma aged 42 was married to-P. W. 4 but got separated from him to live with her parents P. Ws. 1 and 2 and two of her children in Thulasivilasom House for the last eight or nine years. While so living, she became pregnant due to illicit intimacy with Rajappa Menon, her cousin. She showed reluctance to acknowledge her pregnancy till about October 1962 when P. W. 9 the mid-wife of the Muhamma Primary Health Unit examined her in the Unit Office and declared her to be five months' pregnant. The mid-wife continued to take care of the pregnant woman with such solicitude that soon the whole locality including P. Ws. 1 and 2 became fully aware of the accused's pregnancy.3. It is alleged that o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »