Kerala Court October 1972 Judgments
Vijayaraghavan Vs. Velu and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-31-1972
Reported in: (1973)ILLJ490Ker
G. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. This is an appeal by opposite party No. 2 against the order of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner directing the payment by the appellant of a sum of Rs. 3,600 as compensation under Section 3 of the Workmen's Compensation Act to the applicant. The applicant's son Narayanan died on 12-7-1967 as a result of injury sustained by him by accident while employed at a quarry near Mulloorkara. The appellant had entered into a contract to supply certain quantity of metal (granite stones) to the Southern Railway. The opposite party No. 1 had in turn entered into an agreement with the appellant to supply the required quantity of metal at a specified rate. He had engaged the deceased Narayanan as a cooly to quarry the metal from a quarry at Mulloorkara. It was while he was working there that he met with the accident and died. The applicant who is the father of the deceased made a claim before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation against the opposite party No. 1 a...
Tag this Judgment!N. Sreenivasan Vs. Director of Enforcement, New Delhi and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-30-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Ker249
ORDERV.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, J. 1. The petitioners' permises were searched on 26-9-1970 and their Post Office Savings Bank Account Book and certain other documents were seized by the Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate, Shastri Bhavan Madras. Ext. P-l notice dated 22-12-1970, was issued to the petitioners stating that the 1st petitioner had received without general or special exemption from Reserve Bank of India four payments amounting to Rs. 24,200/- from persons other than authorised dealers in foreign exchange by order or on behalf of Shri N. Sadanandan of Malaysia and that there was a contravention of the provisions of certain specified sections of the Foreign Exchange Regulations Act 1947. He was, therefore, called upon to show cause why adjudication proceedings contemplated in S. 23-D of the Foreign Exchange Regulations Act 1947 should not be held against him for the contravention and why the amount of Rs. 20,000/- daposited in his savings bank account and Rs. 4,000/- depo...
Tag this Judgment!P.K. Kumaran Vs. Thodu Sankaran and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-27-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Ker183
ORDERV.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. The petitioner made an application to the Land Tribunal Thalikulam under Section 77 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. 1963, to shift the kudikidappu of Respondents 1 to 7 residing in his property. The matter was disposed of by Ext. P-3 order which reads as follows:'The deposition of the 1st applicant reveals that the land on which the kudikidappu is situate measures only 10 cents of land and that the land where the 1st and 3rd applicants reside measures 60 cents. The contention of the applicant that they are in need of the 10 cents of the land whereon the kudikidappu is situate, read together with the offer of 10 cents from the land where they are now residing makes me doubt the good intentions of the applicants. 'You come to my place, I will go to your place' is en interesting offer. But I cannot go to the extent of enforcing that offer and requisition. I reject the application. However no rests is ordered'. The order of the Land Tribunal is extremely un...
Tag this Judgment!Damodara Menon Vs. Variath and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-27-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Ker132
ORDERK. Bhaskaran, J.1. A short, but rather interesting and important, question arises for decision in this revision filed under Section 103 of the Land Reforms Act. The question is whether a lessee inducted into possession of the property by a person having life interest alone is entitled to apply for fixation of lair rent in respect of the holding.2. The Land Tribunal without going into the merit of the case and without recording a finding on the pleadings relating to the genuineness of the lease set up by the respondents herein (the petitioner and the legal representative of the 3rd respondent before the Land Tribunal), held that inasmuch as the party arrayed as the landlord had only a limited interest, the question of fixation of fair rent did not arise. The Land Tribunal, for its conclusion, placed reliance on clause (vi) of sub-section (1) of Section 3 of Act 1 of 1964 as amended by Act 35 of 1969, which reads as follows:--'3. Exemptions.-- (1) Nothing in this Chapter shall apply...
Tag this Judgment!P.K. Rajappan Pillai Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-26-1972
Reported in: (1973)ILLJ498Ker
ORDER1. This is an application under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in which the petitioner, an employee of the Travancore-Cochin Chemicals, Ltd., Eloor, prays that the departmental enquiry pending against him be suspended pending disposal of C.C.No. 884 of 1972 on the file of the Sub-Magistrate's Court, Parur, on identical facts.2. The facts of the case are: On 30-4-1972 at about 8-15 a.m. the petitioner was intercepted by the gateman when he was going on his scooter when it was found that he had committed theft of mercury. Disciplinary proceedings were taken against him by the 2nd respondent. The accused was also charge-sheeted under Section 379 I.P.C. on a complaint made to the police. On 30-4-1972 the petitioner was suspended pending enquiry,3. The 2nd respondent issued a notice to the petitioner to which the latter replied on 4-5-72 asking for time upto 17-5-72 on account of alleged ill-health. Accordingly, the enquiry was adjourned to 18-5-1972. The enquiry was ...
Tag this Judgment!T.S. Ramaswamy Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-25-1972
Reported in: [1974]93ITR598(Ker)
ORDERKalid, J.1. This is a petition under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed for quashing the proceedings in C.C. No. 336 of 1971 on the file of the District Magistrate's Court, Quilon, initiated at the instance of the Income-tax Officer under Section 227 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the new Act.2. The facts leading to the prosecution relevant for consideration in this case are as follows : The petitioner is a partner in Union Engineering Company, Quilon, a firm registered under the new Act. On September 13, 1962, one of the partners, the father of the other partners died, and a new partnership came into being on September 18, 1962. For the assessment year 1961-62, corresponding to the accounting year ending with May 31, 1960, the petitioner herein submitted a return on May 29, 1962, showing an income of Rs. 23,947. The Income-tax Officer called for the accounts of the firm for scrutiny. On examination he detected some suppression. He found...
Tag this Judgment!Ranganatha Agencies Vs. Food Inspector, Badagara Municipality
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-25-1972
Reported in: 1974CriLJ55
E.K. Moidu, J.1. The only question that falls to be decided in this Criminal Revision Petition is whether the provisions of Section 20-A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (Central Act 37 of 1954) can be enforced against the Revision Petitioner for his impleadment as an additional accused in C. C. 281 of 1970 which is pending trial before the Additional I Class Magistrate, Quilandy against the original accused, in respect of the offence under Section 7 (1) read with Section 16 (1) (a) (1) of the aforesaid Act.2. This question arose for consideration out of the order of the lower court dated 29-12-1971 impleading the revision petitioner as an additional accused in the case pending before the lower court. The case against the original accused was lodged by the Food Inspector, Badagara on the allegation that the sweets he purchased from the original accused was adulterated. On 13-11-1969 the Food Inspector purchased one Kilo of sweets designated as 'Raj Sweets' for Rs. 3/- f...
Tag this Judgment!Cherunni Vs. Purushothama Iyer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-11-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Ker174
K. Sadasivan, J. 1. Plaintiff is the appellant. He sued the defendant for balance due on accounts. Plaintiff is the owner of a rice mill, from whom the defendant used to purchase rice on credit. According to the plaintiff, a sum of Rs. 1767.74 P. was due as on 15th September. 1964. The suit was filed on 29-3-1965. Defendant contended that his last purchase on credit was in March, 1960 and so the suit was barred by limitation. He also stated that all amounts due had been discharged by him. The trial Court decreed the suit But on appeal, the learned Subordinate Judge has reversed that decision, and dismissed thesuit holding that the claim is barred by limitation. 2. I see no reason to interferewith the judgment of the learned appellate Judge. It is admitted that the lastpurchase on credit by the defendant wason 14-3-1960. After that date also therewere purchases, but they were all cashpurchases. The plaintiff would put forward the case that after the balance wasstruck on the 14th of Marc...
Tag this Judgment!Jacob Philip Vs. State Bank of Travancore and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-10-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Ker51
Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. This appeal is by the 3rd defendant in a suit for eviction and recovery of possession on the basis of Ex. P-3 lease dated 27-7-1956 granted to the 1st defendant in the suit for a term of one year on a rent of Rs. 480/-, The les-for was the Travancore Forward Bank which, consequent on the amalgamation of Banks, was taken over in or about 1960 by the State Bank of Travancore, which instituted the suit. The appellant and the 2nd defendant had a contention that Ex. P-3 lease was benami for their benefit, but this was found against by the trial court and was not repeated before us. The appellants claimed to be entitled to fixity of tenure under Section 13 of the Kerala Act 1 of 1964. But this was found against, by reason of the exemption contained in Section 3 (1) (i) of the Act. Their further contention that the suit was bad for want of a proper notice to quit, was also found against on the ground that there was a contract to the contrary which was sufficient to disp...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Casino (Pvt.) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-1972
Reported in: [1973]91ITR289(Ker)
Subramonian Poti, J.1. This is a reference to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, arid the question referred to us is :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is legally correct in holding that the activity carried on by the assessee in preparing articles of food from raw materials, constitutes ' manufacture or processing of goods ' within the meaning of section2(6)(d) of the Finance Act, 1968, and that the assessee is an ' Industrial company ' within the meaning of the definition contained in that section '2. The assessee is a private limited company running a hotel business. In connection with the assessment of the company for the year 1968-69, the assessee claimed to be an ' industrial company ' as the term is denned in the Finance Act, 1968. The claim to be assessed at the rate of tax applicable to an industrial company, namely, at 55 per cent, of the net income, was not accepted by the Income-tax Officer. Before...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »