Kerala Court October 1970 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.
Kukkila Narayana Naik Vs. the Additional District Magistrate, Cannanor ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-30-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker162
ORDERM.U. Isaac, J.1. The petitioner has been holding two licenses under the Arms Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), one for possession of a gun and another for possession of a revolver. He received a notice Ext. P-1 dated 24-1-1968 from the first respondent, the Additional District Magistrate. Cannanore, calling upon him to show cause in writing within 15 days of its receipt as to why the above licenses should not be cancelled for the reasons mentioned in the said notice. Ext. P-1 stated that it had been brought to the notice of the first respondent thatat about 1-00 P. M. on 10-7-1966, the petitioner threatened with his revolver by firing in the air one Venkatesha Murthy and his two coolies, while they were working in a plot of land allotted to him on dharkast in R. S. No. 315/3 of Maire Village, stating that Venkatesha Murthy had no right over the property, that enquiries conducted in the matter revealed that the petitioner was a hot-tempered man and that his being in p...
James Chereath, Manager, C.J.M.U.P. School Vs. the Regional Deputy Dir ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-28-1970
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ653Ker
M.U. Isaac, J.1. The short question that arises for decision in these two cases is whether the power of revision vested in the State Government under Rule 92 in Chapter XIV(A) of the Kerala Education Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) relates only to orders passed by a subordinate authority in respect of matters falling under Chapter XIV(A) of the rules or whether the said power is applicable in respect of any order passed by n subordinate authority under the Rules.2. By an order Ext. P. 5 dated 22.7.1968, the Regional Deputy Director of Public Instruction, Ernakulam, who is the first respondent in O.P. 3734 of 1968, held that the petitioner who is the manager of an aided school was unlit to hold the post of a manager of that school or in any other aided school in the State of Kerala. By a similar order dated 24.7.1968, which is marked as Ext. P-9 in O.P. No. 3777 of 1968, the Regional Deputy Director of Public Instruction, Trivandrum, who is the second respondent in th...
Modern Woodcrafts, represented by General Manager, Sri P. Muthukrishna ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-28-1970
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ652Ker
P.T. Raman Nair, C.J.1. The certified Standing Order fixing the age of superannuation at 55 was not questioned in the industrial dispute. What was questioned was its applicability to the particular workman concerned. K.K. Raghavan, and this was on the score that he was already in service having been appointed in 1961 when the Standing Order came into force in 1964. Now it is quite clear from the decision of the Supreme Court in Agra Electric Supply Co. v. Alladin 1969 II L.L.J 540. which is on all fours with the present case that a Standing Order applies to all workmen in service whether appointed before or after it was made, and the earlier decisions of the Supreme Court relied upon by the learned single Judge namely, Guest, Keen, Williams Ltd. v. Sterling and Ors. 1959 II L.L.J. 405 and Workmen of Kettle-well Bullen & Co. v. Kettlewell Bullen & Co. 1964 II L.L.J. 146 were distinguished by their Lordships in the light of the Supreme Court decision in Salem-Erode Elecy. Distribution Co...
R. Radhakrishna Reddiar Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-27-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker202; [1971]81ITR521(Ker)
Raghavan, J. 1. A Mitakshara Hindu by name Rajagopala Reddiar of erstwhile Travancore died on 15th May 1950 leaving his widow Nagammal two sons and two daughters. On 16th December 1953, the properties left by Rajagopala Reddiar were partitioned by the widow and her children into four schedules, the two sons taking absolutely schedules A and B respectively and the widow taking schedule C with the restriction that, on her death, the properties would revert to the sons and the daughters, the sons taking equal shares and the daughters taking shares equal to halfthat of the sons. The widow was also given a right to reside in one of the houses called Rajagopala Mandiram during her life. And the daughters were given the properties in Schedule Equally and absolutely out of love and affection for them.2. Nagammal died on 1st May 1959; and the question for us to consder is as to what was the estate left by Nagammal. On this question, the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty held in a Particular m...
P.S. Subramanian Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-27-1970
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ674Ker
P.T. Raman Nayar, C.J.1. The dispute in this case is, we should think, concluded by the decision of tins Court in O.P. Nos. 1715 & 1716 of 1963, two writ petitions raising the same question and disposed of by a common judgment by a Division Bench-the decision is reported in R. Ezhuthachan v. State of Kerala (1965) K.L.T. 485. That was a decision inter parties-the petitioners here were, respondents 30 and 23 respectively in each of those petitions, while, of the present contesting respondents, the 1st respondent Side of Kerala was the 1st respondent in each of those petitions and the present 3rd respondent, the petitioner in O.P. No. 1715 of 1963, and the present 4th respondent, the petitioner in O.P. No. 1716 of 1963. There the Division Bench held-and, with great respect, we think rightly-that the effect of the Government orders, Exts. P-4(a), P-4(b), P-4(c) and P-4(d)-the last mentioned is only a memorandum and not an order properly speaking-dated 7.3.1958, 19.3.1958, 9.6.1959 and 24....
State of Kerala Vs. K.R. Narayanan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-22-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker243
Narayana Pillai, J.1. These are appeals by the State of Kerala from the common judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Trivandrum, disposing of two petitions, one filed by the appellant for setting aside the award passed by the Arbitrator, Mr. R. Sankaranarayana Iyer, Retired Judge of the erstwhile Travan-core High Court, and the other filed by the respondent, a contractor, for correction and modification of the award. The Subordinate Judge refused to set aside the award in its entirety but modified it.2. The salient facts giving rise to the disputes between the parties are as follows. The respondent had undertaken the construction of Mukunnara bridge under the appellant consequent on the acceptance of his tender. The work connected with it was started in 1958 and completed in May 1963. There was delay in the execution of the work. While the respondent imputed it to the appellant the latter imputed it to the former. The work done included not only the construction of the bridge but also the...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian Chamber of Commerce
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-22-1970
Reported in: [1970]80ITR645(Ker)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench 'B', has stated a case with reference to the years of assessments 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1964-65 and has referred to the following question for our decision.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that, the income of the assessee isexempt from taxation under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1964-65 ?'2. The assessee is the Indian Chamber of Commerce, Cochin, registered under Section 23(1) of the Cochin Companies Act, 1920. The objects of the association are seen from its memorandum of association which are extracted in the order of the Tribunal as well as in the statement of the case. We may refer to a few of these objects as seen from the memorandum as they are relied on by counsel on behalf of the revenue. They are Clauses (a), (b), (c), (h), and (i) which read as follows :'(a) To promote and protect the trade, commerc...
Ammukutty Amma and anr. Vs. Madhavi Amma
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-20-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker90
Unnikrishna Kurup, J.1. These appeals against second appeals arise from two suits. O. S. Nos. 329 and 340 of 1121 on the file of Munsiffs Court, Ettumanoor. O. S. No. 329 of 1121, from which A. S. No. 410 of 1965 arises, was filed for specific performance of an agreement to sell the plaint schedule property entered into by the 1st defendant in the suit with the plaintiff. The 1st defendant thereafter gifted the property to his wife, the 2nd defendant, and defendants 1 and 2 sold the property to the 3rd defendant. The prayer in the suit was to compel the 1st defendant to execute a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff on receipt of the amount stipulated to be paid under agreement to sell.2. A. S. No. 409 of 1965 arises from 0. S. No. 340 of 1121. That was a suit filed for redemption by the 3rd defendant in O. S. No. 329 of 1121 against the plaintiff in that suit on the strength of a possessory mortgage for Rs. 225/-and the result of this suit was mainly dependent upon the suit for specif...
Pullangode Rubber and Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-16-1970
Reported in: [1971]79ITR738(Ker)
Raghavan, J.1. The question referred in these cases is: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amounts of Rs. 17,250 and Rs. 18,752, representing the sale proceeds of timber cut and removed with roots constitute revenue receipts in the hands of the assessee and are taxable as such under the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' and the facts of the case are the following. The assessee is a limited liability company doing rubber plantation business; and the assessee took on lease an extent of about 2,000 acres of forest land from the Senior Rani (the Valiya Thamburatti) of the Patinhare Kovilakam under two leases, the first of 3rd August, 1913, and the second of 9th July, 1937. The assessee agreed to pay an annual rent of Rs. 250, and an additional sum of Rs. 2 for every acre of land brought under rubber cultivation. And the lease was for a term of 99 years. The second lease deed of 1937 provided, in clarification of the provisions in the earlier lease deed, that the assessee...
M.K. Prakash Vs. A.P. Parukutty Moopilamma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-15-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker248
Govindan Nair, J.1. This is a petition against respondents 1 to 5 for contempt of the Munsiff-Magistrate's Court, Perambra and of this Court, the 3rd respondent being the Munsiff-Magistrate himself. The case against respondent 5 has not been pressed and no charges have been framed against him.2. Charges have been framed against each of the other four respondents and along with the charges, statements of allegations have also been furnished indicating the basis of the charges.2 (1). The charges against the 1st respondent. A. P. Parukutty Mooppil-amma are similar to those against her son the 2nd respondent, Achuthankutty Nair, and they can be summarised as follows: It is alleged that they took, proceedings before the Police and Forest authorities without good faith as a device 'to help the iurisdiction of the Court' of the Munsiff-Magistrate of Perambra in order to cause oppression and injustice tothe petitioner and to gain unlawful advantage; and without any colour of right and in order...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »