Kerala Court February 1973 Judgments
Appunni Vs. Nani
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-28-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Ker281
ORDERK. Bhaskaran, J.1. This revision is by the defendant in the suit and it involves the interpretation of Sub-section (3) of Section 125 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act (Act 1 of 1964) as amended by Act 35 of 1969, hereinafter referred to as the Act.2. The suit as originally framed was one for injunction. But it was subsequently amended to be one for recovery of possession on the strength of title. After the amendment, in his additional written statement, the defendant raised the contention that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to decide the question regarding his rights as a tenant arising in the suit and pleaded that the question relating to tenancy right had to be referred to the Land Tribunal for decision and the suit stayed pending receipt of the decision of the Land Tribunal.3. Issue No. II in the suit reads:-- 'Whether the suit is liable to be staved and referred to the Land Tribunal under Section 125 (3) of Act 1/64?'4. This revision is directed against the finding of the c...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Agrl. Income-tax Vs. Kerala Estate
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-28-1973
Reported in: [1974]96ITR210(Ker)
Govindan Nair, J. 1. A somewhat difficult question has been referred to us by the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Trivan-drum. The question is this :' Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the amount of Rs. 33,747.09 is not agricultural income for the assessment year 1964-65 '2. The assessees, seven in number, have the status of tenants-in-common. They owned an estate from which they derived agricultural income liable to be assessed in the year 1963-64. The assessees then claimed that a sum of Rs. 33,747.09 was payable towards interest on a loan of Rs. 4 lakhs taken by them from M/s. Associated Planters Ltd., Calicut. In computing the agricultural income liable to be assessed to tax in the year 1963-64, this sum was allowed to be deducted. In the accounting period relating to the assessment year 1964-65, M/s. Associated Planters Ltd. waived the claim for interest and, thefore, the amount was credited to the re...
Tag this Judgment!John Manjooran Vs. C.M. Stephen and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-28-1973
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1722
K. Bhaskaran, J.1. Whether the impugned portion of Ex. P-l (a) report of the speech alleged to have been made by the first accused, published in the Mathrubhoomi daily of which the second accused Is the printer and publisher, is defamatory of the complainant, and, if so whether the accused are protected by Exceptions 1 and 9 to Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, are the main questions involved in this appeal against acquittal. The prosecution was launched by Sri Mathai Manjooran. the Minister for Labour. Government of Kerala, in the Ministry that was sworn in on the 6th of March 1967. and was on his death on 15-1-1970, continued by his brother Sri. John Manjooran, claiming to be the legal representative of the deceased, and the General Secretary of the Kerala Socialist Party.2. Section 499. IPC and Exceptions 1 and 9 to that section read as follows:-499. Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputati...
Tag this Judgment!Nair Service Society Ltd., Perunna, Changanacherry Vs. K.C. Alexander ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-27-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Ker94
Gopalan Nambiyar, J. 1. O. S. No. 10 of 1958, Sub Court. Mavelikara was a suit for recovery of over 130 acres of land, instituted by the 1st Respondent in this appeal against the appellant herein (who was the 1st Defendant in the suit) and others. The property belongs to the Government: and the 1st Respondent, himself a trespasser on Government property, had been evicted from nearly 160 acres, which, thereafter, were demised on kuthakappattom to the appellant The 130 and odd acres which are the subject-matter of the suit are said to be adjacent, to the 160 and odd acres from which the 1st Respondent had been evicted. The suit was decreed on appeal to the High Court, against the 1st Defendant also. The decision is reported in 1966 K. L. T. 333. There was an appeal to the Supreme Court which dismissed the appeal in respect of a portion of the property, and allowed the amendment of the written statement prayed for by the 1st Defendant in regard to the rest, and remanded the suit for trial...
Tag this Judgment!T.C. Vadivel and ors. Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Special Circle Ii and ors ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-27-1973
Reported in: [1973]31STC602(Ker)
T.C. Raghavan, C.J.1. The appellants in all these appeals are millers of groundnut oil; and they impugn the Notification S.R.O. No. 211/67 passed by the Government of Kerala under Section 10(1) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act of 1963. The learned Judge who heard the writ petitions dismissed the petitions and hence the appeals.2. The impugned notification reads :S.R.O. No. 211/67.-In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (Act 15 of 1963), the Government of Kerala, having considered it necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby reduce the rate of tax payable by an oil-miller under the said Act in respect of his sales of groundnut oil and its cake from 3 per cent, to one per cent subject to the condition that the turnover of groundnut, from which the said oil and cake are produced by him in his mill within the State, is assessed to tax or is liable to tax at his hands.3. The appellants claim to be oil-millers...
Tag this Judgment!K.C. Luckose Vs. Income-tax Officer, B-ward and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-26-1973
Reported in: [1973]92ITR450(Ker)
Isaac, J.1. This petition has been filed by an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961, to quash an order, exhibit P-5, dated February 5, 1970, of the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala, in so far as he has included a sum of Rs. 13,607 in the total income of the assessee under the head capital gains while giving substantial reduction to him under other heads. 2. The petitioner was assessed by the first respondent, the Income-tax Officer, Kottayam, for the year 1964-65, fixing his total income at Rs. 80,550. It consists of Rs. 15,470 under the head business and Rs. 65,007 under Section 41(2) of the Act, namely, difference between sale price and written down value of machinery. The assessee filed a revision before the Commissioner, objecting to the above computation; He allowed the petitioner's objection regarding the computation of income under business to a large extent and reduced the same to Rs. 6,850. Regarding the income under Section 41(2) of the Act, the se...
Tag this Judgment!Kittunni Subramoniam Vs. Kunhumon and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-21-1973
Reported in: 1974CriLJ548
ORDERP. Narayana Pillai, J.1. P.W. 2 in C. C. 1072 of 1972 on the file of the Second Class Magistrate, Trichur, is the Revision Petitioner. He and P.Ws. 1 and 3 are watchmen and P.W. 4 is the Superintendent in the Mepadom Rubber Estate. The accused, two in number, who were charged under Sections 447, 341, 324 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code were acquitted and it is that acquittal that is sought to be revised here.2. The occurrence took place at or about 12-30 in the noon on August 8, 1971. The accused trespassed into the Estate and cut grass. When P.W. 2 asked them to go away the second accused wrongfully restrained him and the first accused cut him with a sickle. The plea of the accused was one of denial.3. The Magistrate has in his judgment discussed the evidence adduced in the case only in so far as it relates to the offences under Sections 341 and 324 and not to the offence under Section 447 of the I.P.C. The evidence of the occurrence witnesses, P.Ws. 1 to 3, shows that the accuse...
Tag this Judgment!Varkey John Vs. Varkey Stanselose and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-20-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Ker198
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. In accordance with my order dated 5th September, 1972, the Additional District Judge has returned the findings called for on the question as to whether the plaintiff-appellant is entitled to relief (F) or, in the alternative, relief (G) contained in the plaint The findings are in favour of the appellant; and counsel for the 1st respondent has preferred objections to the findings.1-A. The learned Additional District Judge has recorded:'The defendant does not dispute the existence of the canals on the 4 sides of the plaint B schedule not only at the time of the institution of the suit, even at the time of the controversial original central channel in B Schedule was in existence. So also he has no serious dispute that after the destruction of the central channel in E schedule water from plaintiff's A schedule property was being carried and drained out towards south through the north, south, west and eastern canals.'Adverting to the question how far the plaintif...
Tag this Judgment!Shah Vrajlal Madhavji Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-20-1973
Reported in: [1974]95ITR614(Ker)
Govindan Nair, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following two questions to this court:' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessment of the sum of Rs. 38,525 as capital gains chargeable to tax under Section 45 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is valid in law ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessment of the sum of Rs. 90,867 as capital gains arising to the assessee in the assessment year 1963-64 is valid in law ?' 2. The year of assessment is 1963-64 and the relevant previous year ended on October 28, 1962. During that previous year, a property which belonged to the assessee was compulsorily acquired under the Land Acquisition Act (1 of 1894). It is admitted in the application moved by the assessee before the Tribunal under Section 256(1) that the transfer of the property took place on April 1, 1962, and that the award of the Land Acquisition Officer was passed on April 5, 1962 (vide p...
Tag this Judgment!Puthivapuravil Pocker and ors. Vs. V. Khalid and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-16-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Ker121
Subramonian Potf, J. 1. A. S. No. 93 of 1968 is an appeal against the decision in O. P. No. 218 of 1965 and A. S No. 143 of 1968 is against the decision in O. P. No. 44 of 1965. Both the appeals are by the same parties.2. O. P. No. 44 of 1965 was filed for an order directing the first respondent in that petition who was an arbitrator appointed under the Arbitration Act, 1940 to file the Award in Court, to eive notice to the parties regarding the filim Of the Award, hear the objections of the petitioners to the Award so as to makemodifications to the Award and to pass a decree on the basis of the Award. The first respondent was, at the relevant time, an advocate and he was appointed as an arbitrator to decide certain disputes concerning allotment of property to the parties to the dispute. He is seen to have made the award Exhibit B-l, which is seen dated 2nd March, 1965. Under Clause 3 of the First Schedule to the Arbitration Act. 1940 the arbitrator has to make his Award within four mo...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »