Kerala Court May 1972 Judgments
P. Krishnakumar Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-31-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Ker14; (1972)IILLJ576Ker
ORDERV. Balakrishna Eradi, J.1. The petitioner is the manager of an aided upper primary school at Shoranur. The school was originally started by the petitioner's grandfather more than 60 years ago. After the death of the founder the petitioner's father succeeded him as the manager of the school. He died in June, 1966 when the petitioner was only 19 years old. In spite of his young age the petitioner had to take up the responsibility of administering the school as its manager and he took over the said burden. It would appear that the petitioner found it difficult to properly look after the management of the school, especially in view of the fact that ha was not keeping normal health and was unable to move out freely on account of some defect in his knee joints. Hence on 27-5-1971 he addressed a letter Ext. P-1 to the Director of Public Instruction, Trivandrum (2nd respondent) intimating the latter about the petitioner's intention to close down this school with effect from the academic y...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. A.R. Sulaiman Sait and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-31-1972
Reported in: AIR1972Ker274
Viswanatha Iyer, J. 1. This ap-peal is by the State against the decision of the Alleppey Sub Court in L. A. R. No. 54 of 1970. An area of 6 acres of land comprised in two survey numbers, 511/1-11 and 512/C3-2, situated in the Alleppey Village was acquired by the Government for the purpose of construction of South Police Quarters. Alleppey. Section 3 Notification was issued on 8-4-1969 and the State took possession on 15-7-1970. Pattadars, namely plaintiffs 1 to 10, who wore in actual possession of the land, claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,200/- per cent. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 940/- per cent for 38 cents adjoining the road and at the rate of Rs. 750/- per cent for the remaining area of 5 acres 62 cents. From the amount so fixed, a sum of Rs. 6,894.74 was deducted towards reclamation charges. The value of the land in actual occupation of the kudikidappukars, (23 in number) amounting to Rs. 20.460.58 was further deducted. The balanc...
Tag this Judgment!Agricultural Income-tax Officer Vs. C.P.A. Yoosuf and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-31-1972
Reported in: [1973]90ITR501(Ker)
Raghavan, C.J.1. The decision of the single judge appealed against in the first of these appeals is reported as C. P. A. Yoosuf v. Income-tax Officer, Kottayam, [1970] 77 I.T.R. 237 (Ker.), and the said decision has been followed in another writ petition, the judgment in which is questioned in the second of the appeals. In both the cases, the assessees are purchasers of rubber trees for slaughter-tapping ; and the single judge construing the documents of purchase, has held that, under these documents, the purchasers derived no interest in the land and what they derived was only a right to the trees. And in view of that, the learned judge has held that the income derived by the purchasers of the trees from slaughter-tapping was not agricultural income.2. The Government Pleader has not been able to impress us as to how the decision of the single judge (in Yoosufs case) is erroneous, in view of the recitals in the relevant documents of purchase in these cases. The Government Pleader has, ...
Tag this Judgment!i.V. Somasundaram Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Special Circle Ii
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-30-1972
Reported in: [1973]30STC260(Ker)
M.U. Isaac, J.1. The petitioner is the proprietor of a printing press who undertakes job-works. For the year 1968-69, the petitioner was assessed by the respondent, the Sales Tax Officer, Special Circle II, Palghat, under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, on a total turnover of Rs. 45,303.34 which represented the petitioner's gross receipts on account of cost of paper supplied for executing the orders for printing and also the printing charges. The petitioner .claimed exemption in respect of a sum of Rs. 8,501.91, which he received on account of printing judgments of courts. That claim was disallowed. He has now filed this writ petition on the basis of the decision of this court in Srinivasa Printing Works v. Sales Tax Officer 1967 K.L.J. 665 contending that no portion of his turnover is taxable, as the business carried on by him does not constitute any sale of goods. In that case, the dealer's turnover was assessed as falling under item 42 in Schedule I of the Act, which was cha...
Tag this Judgment!K. Kunhi Mohammad Hajee Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-26-1972
Reported in: [1974]93ITR193(Ker)
Subramonian Poti, J.1. The petitioner in O.P. No. 4323 of 1969 and the petitioners in O. P. No. 4451 of 1969 together constitute the legal representatives of the deceased, P. Kunhi Bava, who was an assesses under the Agricultural Income-tax Act and was being assessed to tax till the assessment year 1963-69. He died on July 18, 1968. After his death, when proceedings for assessment were taken up the legal representatives took the stand that, though the income derived by Kunhi Bava till the date of his death, namely, July 18, 1968, was liable to be assessed at the hands of the legal representatives, they were liable to be assessed only as tenants-in-common for the period subsequent to July 18, 1968. Apparently, the Agricultural Income-tax Officer took the stand that, for the accounting year in which Kunhi Bava died, the income ought to be assessed as if Kunhi Bava was alive for the whole of the year and tax was payable as if the income was derived by him during that year. For this, relia...
Tag this Judgment!L. Krishnan and ors. Vs. the Divisional Personnel Officer, Southern Ra ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-26-1972
Reported in: (1972)IILLJ568Ker
P. Subramonian Poti, J.1. The petitioners were employed as 'khalasies' in the Olavakot Division of the Southern Railway. After continuous service of six months, all the petitioners were declared to have acquired the status of 'temporary workmen' falling within the scope of Chapter XXIII of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual. They were in continuous service for more than one year within the meaning of that term as employed in Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 read with Section 25B thereof. While so, their services were terminated by the second respondent, the Loco Foreman, Southern Railway, Shoranur. This was during the period between 16-1-1970 and 234-1970. There was no case that any written order of termination was issued to the petitioners. Though this termination is challenged in the original petition on several grounds one of them alone was urged by the petitioners' counsel at the hearing and, therefore, we need only advert to It. It is said that the termination...
Tag this Judgment!R. Prabhakaran Nair and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-25-1972
Reported in: (1972)IILLJ565Ker
P. Govindan Nair, J.1. The question raised in these two petitions is the same, and it relates to the complaints of persons who have been working in the Civil Supplies Department in the State which was made a separate department. Admittedly from the year 1962 the promotion posts available in the department were not exclusively reserved for those working in the Civil Supplies Department but 50 per cent of such posts were reserved for promotions of persons working in the Revenue Department in the State. The pleadings in these cases are fairly elaborate. When the petitions were filed, the reservation of a percentage of the promotion posts for those in the Revenue Department was governed by executive orders and such orders have been impugned in these petitions. We are, however, not referring to these executive orders in view of the subsequent events that have taken place, framing of special rules by the State Government under the Kerala Public Services Act, 1968 relating to the Kerala Civil...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Vs. Southern Fisheries Corporatio ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-1972
Reported in: [1973]89ITR126(Ker)
Subramonian Potti, J.1. The reference before us is under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the question referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, is :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in cancelling the order of penalty passed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under Section 271(c) read with the Explanation thereto '2. The assessee is a firm of two partners. This firm took over the business of another firm in which the partners of the assessee-firm were also partners. The business was one of processing and exporting of prawns. The assessee filed its return for the assessment year 1964-65 showing an income of Rs. 2,785.47. In arriving at this income the closing stock of the business had been valued at Rs. 7,03,123. The assessee had worked out the cost per pound on the basis of the total cost of production divided by the total quantity of raw materials. The Income-tax Officer took the view ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›