Skip to content

Kerala Court November 1966 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.

Nov 15 1966

Velukutty Vs. Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.

Court: Kerala

Decided on: Nov-15-1966

Reported in: [1967]20STC28(Ker)

S. Velu Pillai, J.1. The petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 14 of the General Sales Tax Act, 1125 (Act 11 of 1125) against an assessment made under Section 12(2). That Act, which may be referred to hereafter as the 1125 Act, was repealed with effect from the 1st April, 1963, by the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (Act 15 of 1963) which may be referred to hereafter as the 1963 Act. The appeal was decided on the 18th April, 1964. The 2nd respondent in this petition, the State Government, appealed against the said decision, under Section 39 of the 1963 Act, to the Appellate Tribunal, which by its order, exhibit P-3 dated the 5th February, 1965, overruled the preliminary objection, that the State Government had no right of appeal against the decision of the appellate authority. This petition is to quash exhibit P-3.2. Section 14 of the 1125 Act, which conferred the right of appeal on an assessee against his assessment, provided by Sub-section (4) thereof, that 'every order pas...


Nov 14 1966

V.M. Ravi Nambudiripad Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Agricu ...

Court: Kerala

Decided on: Nov-14-1966

Reported in: AIR1967Ker215; [1967]65ITR81(Ker)

ORDER1. The petitioner if the head and manager of a Nambudiri Illom. The Illom was assessed to tax under the Agricultural Income-tax Act. 1950, in respect of the assessment year 1958-59, 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62. All the four assessment orders were passed on 14-3-1962. 2. Section 3 of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, provides that agricultural income-tax at the rate or rates specified in the Schedule to that Act shall be charged for each financial year in accordance with and subject to the previsions of that Act on the total agricultural income of the previous year. Sub-sections (3) and (4) of that section as they stood on the date of the assessment orders--14-3-1962--read as follows: '3. In the case of an undivided Aliyasanthana family or branch or Maruniakkathayam tarwad including a Nmbudiri family or a family like that of the Moothathu or any other class governed by the law applicable to Nambudiries consisting of more than five members and whose agricultural income exceeds...


Nov 07 1966

Stanes Motors (South India) Ltd., Coimbatore Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Decided on: Nov-07-1966

Reported in: [1967]19STC209(Ker)

Velu Pillai, J. 1. In the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Town Municipal Committee, Amraoti Taluq v. Ramchandra Vasudeo Chimote, AIR 1964 SC 1166 and C. Rajagopalachari v. Corporation of Madras, AIR 1964 SC 1172 it has to be held, that the only rate at which tax can be levied on works contract, if at all, is at 3 pies in the rupee as provided in Section 3 (1) (b) of the Travancore-Cochin General Sales Tax Act, 1126. In this case, the levy is at a higher rate, viz., 2 nP. in the rupee. There is also a surcharge under the Kerala Surcharge on Taxes Act, 1967 'which is not attempted to be supported in respect of works contract by the department. 2. In these circumstances, we think that the proper course will be to quash the assessment and leave the department to make a fresh assessment, if possible, in accordance with law In the view we have taken, the other contentions of counsel for the petitioner do not arise for consideration and are not considered in this judgment. This...


Nov 04 1966

Ramakrishna Ayyar (S.) Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Decided on: Nov-04-1966

Reported in: (1967)IILLJ419Ker

K.K. Mathew, J.1. The petitioner is a senior Inspector Co-operative Department of the Kerala State. He is a graduate and has passed the obligatory departmental tests. He says that he in the was entitled to be promoted as Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies. Consequent on the reorganization of States, respondents 3 to 34 were allotted to Kerala State from Madras. In Madras State there were three categories of officers In the executive staff of the Madras Co-operative Subordinate Service, namely, sub-registrars, senior Inspectors and junior Inspectors. On 1 August 1958, the Go-operative Department of the Kerala State was reorganized. The sub-registrars allotted from Madras State were equated with the senior inspectors, grade I, of the erstwhile Travancore-Cochin State. Senior Inspectors from Madras State were Integrated with the co-operative Inspectors, grade II, of the erstwhile Travancore-Cochin State. The junior Inspectors from Madras were placed one block below the newly-In...


Nov 02 1966

Kesava Pillai Vs. Senior Superintendent of Post Offices and anr.

Court: Kerala

Decided on: Nov-02-1966

Reported in: (1967)IILLJ828Ker

V.P. Gopalan nambiyar, J.1. The petitioner who was the postman in the Tirumala post office daring the period from 4 October 1963 to 3 February 1964 was charged with gross carelessness and negligence for non-observance of the provisions of Rule 709 (1) and 709 (3) of Chap. XIII of the Posts and Telegraphs Manual, Vol. VI, in effecting payment of amounts covered by the three money orders specified in the charge. The charge was enquired into and found proved by the enquiring authority. The petitioner was thereupon served with a show-cause notice against the proposed punishment of dismissal from service. After considering the petitioner's representations, by proceedings of the disciplinary authority (Ex. P. 3), the enquiry report was accepted and the proposed punishment of dismissal from service was Inflicted upon the petitioner. This writ petition as originally filed was to quash Ex. P. 3. The petitioner would appear to have preferred an appeal against Ex. P. 3 order and subsequent to the...


Nov 01 1966

Miss Laila Chacko and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Decided on: Nov-01-1966

Reported in: AIR1967Ker124

ORDERK.K. Mathew, J. 1. In the Prospectus for direct admission to the First Year M.B.B.S. Course in Government Medical Colleges for 1966-67, it is stated that:'Candidates who have passed the Intermediate Examination of the erstwhile Travancore University or Kerala University with Physics, Chemistry (including Organic Chemistry and practical) and Biology as optionals after 1947, and candidates of other Universities who have passed the Intermediate in Science (Medical group) with practical tests will be eligible for admission. Candidates who have qualified for B.Sc., Degree (8 years Course) of Kerala University or of any other University recognised by the University of Kerala with (a) Physics as main subject and Chemistry and Biology as half subsidiary subjects or (b) with Chemistry as the main and Physics and Biology as half subsidiary Subjects; Or Candidates who have qualified for B.Sc. Degree (3 years course) of Kerala University or of any other University recognised by the Universit...


Nov 01 1966

T.J. Ponnen Vs. M.C. Varghese

Court: Kerala

Decided on: Nov-01-1966

Reported in: AIR1967Ker228; 1967CriLJ1511

ORDERM. Madhavan Nair, J.1. The material question involved in this Crl. R. P., which centres round Section 122 of the Evidence Act, is of considerable general importance, but not of easy solution. Though I have been treated with elaborate discussions by counsel, displaying considerable learning and research, I must confess that I do not feel clarified of all obscurity about it.2. This motion is in a prosecution for defamation launched on September 17, 1965, before the District Magistrate, Trivandrum, by a father-in-law (hereinafter the complainant), against one of his sons-in-law (hereinafter the accused on account of imputations made in three letters sent by the latter on July 18, 28 and 30. 1964, from Bombay, his place of employment to his wife in Trivandrum, who handed them over to the complainant in about September, 1966, when dissensions arose between her and the accused.3. Counsel for the accused before the District Magistrate raised a preliminary objection to the prosecution on ...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial