Kerala Court April 1970 Judgments
Sankara Pillai Madhavan Pillai Vs. Inez Rosario
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-10-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker27
ORDERE.K. Moidu, J. 1. The question that arises for determination in this Civil Revision Petition is whether the respondent-plaintiff has made out a case for temporary injunction restraining the pctilioner-3rd defendant from entering upon the plaint property and conducting a tutorial college thereon and also restraining the petitioner disturbing the quiet possession of the respondent. The suit out of which the petition for temporary injunction arose was one for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property and also for a mandatory injunction directing the defendants in the suit to demolish the 4 sheds erected on the property and by removing the same therefrom thereby giving vacant possession of the property to the respondent. Both the courts below granted the temporary injunction as prayed for. The decretal order passed by the trial court is couched in the following words: 'The defendants are restrained from concluding any tutorial college in the 4 sheds constructed by the 3rd...
Tag this Judgment!Manattillath Krishnan Thangal and ors. Vs. the State of Kerala, Repres ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-09-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker65
Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. This Writ Appeal and these writ petitions were heard together as they raise the question of vires of the Kerala Land Tax Act (Act 13/1901), hereinafter referred to as the Act, unless the context indicates otherwise. The validity of the demand for tax and the steps taken to recover the tax due under the Act have been challenged also on the merits.2. The Act has a legislative history. It is not necessary to trace it earlier than to the provisions of the Travancore Cochin Land Tax Act 15/ 1955. (referred to where necessary as the 1955 Act) applicable in the Travancore-Cochin State. After the re-organisation of States and the formation of the Kerala State, the 1955 Act was made applicable from 1-9-1957 by Act 10/1957 to the Malabar area, newly included to form the Kerala State. A short summary of the main provisions of the said Act would be helpful. The preamble set out that it was necessary to provide for the levy of a low and uniform rate of basic tax on all lands ...
Tag this Judgment!P. Ramachandran and ors. Vs. the State of Kerala Represented by the Se ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-08-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker146
Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J. 1. Theoriginal petitions seek to declare Sections 18(3) (2) (a) (1) and 18A of the Abkari Act, 1 of 1077 and Rule 13 (1) substituted by S.R.O. 70/70 dated 18-2-1970, in tie rules relating to licences for the sale of foreign liquor unconstitutional and for the issue of writ of mandamus to direct the Commissioner of Excise to renew the licences.2. The petitioners were the holders of Foreign Liquor 1 Wholesale licences for sale of foreign liquor for the year 1969-70. The period of their licences expired on 31-3-1970.3. The Cochin Abkari Act, 1 of 1077 and the Travancore Abkari Act, IV of 1073 were continued in force by the Travancore-Cochin State Administration and Application of Laws Act VI of 1125. By Section 2 of the Cochin Abkari (Extension and Amendment) Act, 1967 (Act 10 of 1967) the Cochin Abkari Act, 1 of 1077 and the Rules, Orders and Notifications made and issued thereunder were extended to the areas of the State of Kerala where the said Act was not in fo...
Tag this Judgment!K.P. Varghese Vs. Income-tax Officer, B-ward and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-03-1970
Reported in: [1970]77ITR719(Ker)
M.U. Isaac, J.1. The question arising for decision in this case is whether Section 52 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has any application in computing capital gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset for a consideration lesser than its fair market value; in other words, whether the capital gains is to be computed on the basis of the actual consideration arising to the assessee or on the basis of the fair market value of the asset transferred. The facts, in so far as they are necessary for the decision of the above question, are not in dispute. The petitioner is an assessee to income-tax. For the year 1966-67, his total income during the year ending on 31st December, 1965, was fixed at Rs. 97,890, and he was assessed accordingly. He had purchased an item of house property situate within the municipal town of Ernakulam in 1958, for a consideration of Rs. 16,500. On 25th December, 1965, he sold it for the same consideration in favour of a daughter-in-law and five of his children. O...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›