Kerala Court July 1971 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.
Sree Rama Trading Company Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-13-1971
Reported in: [1971]28STC469(Ker)
T.S. Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J. 1. The petitioner was assessed to sales tax for the year 1966-67 overruling his plea which relates to the levy of tax at 5 per cent. on a turnover of Rs. 63,461.50 representing the first sales of kesophane cellulose films. According to the assessee, kesophane cellulose film does not come under item 42 of the First Schedule in the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, as it stood at the relevant time. The assessing authorities as well as the Tribunal took the view that kesophane cellulose film is 'paper' falling within entry 42 of the First Schedule chargeable at 5 per cent. at the point of first sale.2. Item 42 of the First Schedule reads:Paper (other than newsprint), cardboards, straw-board and their products. 3. The case of the revenue is that though kesophane cellulose film is not included in the terms 'cardboards, straw-board and their products' it is 'paper' within the meaning of the item.4. Kesophane cellulose film is only a trade name and it is agreed ...
Khadiru Meera Rawther Vs. Mytheenkunju Meerankunju
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-09-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ker63
E.K. Moidu, J.1. The 2nd defendant in O. S. 373 of 1965 of the Kottarakara Munsiff's Court challenges in this second appeal the decree and judgment of the courts below on the question as to want of notice to quit as a condition precedent for eviction of the suit property from the possession of the appellant.2. The suit was instituted by the respondent-plaintiff for eviction with arrears and future rent on the basis of Ex. P1 dated 15-6-1960 executed by defendants 1 and 2 in respect of the land over which the appellant and the 1st defendant constructed two mobile shops. The 1st defendant died and the appellant is the sole legal representative. The rate of rent agreed to be paid under Ex. P1 was Rs. 10/- a month. On the expiry of the lease, the appellant continued to be in possession and while so the respondent instituted the suit in 1965 for eviction against the appellant and the 1st defendant 3. The courts below held that no notice to quit was necessary following 3 decisions (1) Abdul ...
Executive Officer, Karukutty Panchayat Vs. Devassy Joseph
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-08-1971
Reported in: 1972CriLJ801
ORDERE.K. Moidu, J.1. In these criminal revision petitions, the only question that comes for consideration is whether the second trial of the respondent on a charge under Section 74 of the Kerala Panchayat Act 1960 read with Rule 26 of the Kerala Panchayat (Taxation and Appeal) Rules 1963 is barred by Sub-section (1) of Section 403 of the Code of Criminal Procedure after the respondent was acquitted of the same charge on withdrawal of the earlier prosecution under Section 248 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The Executive Officer Karukutty Panchayat who is the petitioner in each of these petitions, filed a complaint in C, C. 1333 of 1970 on 2-9-1970 before the Sub Magistrate, Perumbavoor under Section 74 of the Kerala Panchayat Act 1960 read with Rule 26 of the Kerala Panchayat (Taxation and Appeal) Rules 1963 against the respondent for his failure to pay professional tax in respect of the years 1967-68. 1968-69 and 1969-70. When the case came up for hearing on 27-11-1970 the revis...
Aysha Beevi Mariya Ummal Kunju and ors. Vs. Abdul Karim Rahuma Beevi a ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-06-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ker64
ORDERE.K. Moidu, J.1. The point that arises for determination in this Civil Revision Petition is whether a succession certificate should be obtained under Section 214 of the Indian Succession Act (Act 39 of 1925) by the legal representatives of the mortgagee when they seek to get a decree in a suit instituted by them to recover the mortgage money by the sale of the mortgaged property.2. This question has arisen in a suit instituted by the revision petitioners against defendants 1 to 4. The revision petitioners and defendants 5 to 8 are the legal representatives of one Abdul Rahman Meeya Pillai, who died on 29-3-1961. The mortgage in question was executed in favour of the aforesaid Abdul Rahman Meeya Pillai. The petitioners alone instituted the suit though the defendants 5 to 8 supported them. The trial court following the decision in Kundan Lal v. Banwari Lal, 1969 All LJ 946 held that the mortgage debt is also a ''debt' within the meaning of Section 214 of the aforesaid Act The Allaha...
P.J. Alexander Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-06-1971
Reported in: (1971)IILLJ261Ker
P. Naryana Pillai, J.1. For inquiring into the truth of imputations of misconduct or misbehaviour against the petitioner who is a member of the Indian Police Service, borne on the Kerala cadre, the State Government, which is the disciplinary authority and the first respondent in this petition, appointed under Rule 8(2) of the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969 first, Shri R. Gopala Shenoy and later Shri P.A. Quadir Meeran, the second respondent, as the inquiring authority. The presenting officer appointed by the first respondent to present on its behalf the case in support of the articles of charge represented before Shri. R. Gopala Shenoy that it would not be possible to secure the attendance of all witnesses unless coercive steps were issued to them. As the All India Services Rules did not provide for taking coercive steps against unwilling witnesses to secure their attendance before the inquiring authority Shri R. Gopala Shenoy wrote to the Secretary in charge of...
M.G. Kumara Pillai Vs. Kunjulekshmi Amma Bhavani Amma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-01-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ker66
P. Subramonian Poti, J.1. The main question for decision in this appeal concerns the construction of Sections 11 and 19 of the Hindu Succession Act 30 of 1956. On the death of a Hindu, intestate, his properties devolve firstly upon his heirs, being the relatives specified in Class I of the Schedule. Where there are no heirs of Class I, then the properties devolve on the relatives specified in Class II of the Schedule. There are 9 entries in Class II and those in the successive entries come in as heirs in the absence of heirs in the previous entries. The case before me is one of a Hindu dying intestate without heirs mentioned in Class I of the Schedule and also without heirs mentioned in Entries 1, 2 and 3 of Class II of the schedule. It is not disputed that succession is to the heirs all of whom fall within Entry 4 in Class II. That entry specifies the categories of heirs which fall within it as (1) brother's son, (2) sister's son, (3) brother's daughter and (4) sister's daughter. The ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›