Kerala Court April 1973 Judgments
The Indian Trawlers Association, CochIn and ors. Vs. the District Coll ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-06-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Ker46
ORDERG. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. By this petition the petitioners seek for the issue of a writ ofcertiorari or other appropriate order tocancel Exits. P-1 to P-3 proceedings.Ext. P-1 is the Minutes of the conferenceof the people engaged in fishing heldon 28-1-1972 at the Revenue DivisionalOffice. Fort Cochin. Ext. P-2 is a communication from the District Collector,Emakulam to the Secretary, IndianTrawlers Association enclosing theMinutes of the conference for the settlement of dispute between the canoefishermen and mechanised boat operatorsheld on 3-3-1972 at the Collectorate,Emakulam. Ext. P-3 is an order of Government dated 12-7-1972 by which theGovernment directed that the first twomiles from the coast will be reserved forthe non-mechanised boats. Fishing operation by mechanised boats in this areawas prohibited thereunder.2. There are four petitioners in this petition. Petitioner No. 1 is the Indian Trawlers Association represented by its Secretary. Petitioners 2, 3 and 4 are persons e...
Tag this Judgment!Varghese Vs. Iype Kuriakose and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-06-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Ker267
Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant. The plaintiff filed a suit for a declaration that certain sale deeds caused to be executed by him arc null and void and for recovery of possession of those properties with mesne profits. In this appeal we are concerned with only items 1 and 2 of the plaint schedule. In a family partition among the plaintiff and his brothers evidenced by Ext. P-3 dated 13-7-1123 these items were obtained by the plaintiff towards his share. On 15-11-1950 a sale deed Ext. D-1was executed for Rs. 3,000/- in respect of item No. 1 to the 1st defendant. On the same day another sale deed Ext. D-2 was executed in respect of item No. 2 to defendants 2 to 4 for Rs. 7,000/-. With the amount obtained under these sale deeds on the same day certain properties were purchased in the name of the plaintiff and his brothers for Rs. 20,000/-. That sale deed is Ext. P-6. According to the plaintiff, he was a minor on the date these sale deeds were caused to be executed by him...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. R. Kesavan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-06-1973
Reported in: [1974]96ITR365(Ker)
George Vadakkel, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred tinder Section 26(1) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, for our opinion the question:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the transaction evidenced by the deed dated May 7, 1963, was not a gift and that there is no liability to gift-tax ?'2. The short facts leading to the reference as disclosed by the statement of the case and the annexures are as follows: The assessee executed a registered document (annexure 'A') on May 7, 1963, which, according to the revenue, is a gift deed. When called upon under Section 13(2) of the Gift-tax Act to file the return the assessee contended that the deed did not effect any gift, and that it evidenced only a family arrangement; according to the assessee, title to the properties had not passed to his wife and children, who figure as executees in the document, and possession and enjoyment of the prop...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. P.T. Mathew
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-04-1973
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1721
E.K. Moidu, J.1. The State has filed this appeal against the order of the Additional First Class Magistrate, Muvattupuzha acquitting the respondent of the charge under Section 7(i) read with Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. 1954 (Act 37 of 1954) in that the respondent sold to P. W. 1. Food Inspector, some 2 Kg. of prepared food known by the name 'Madakasan' on 11-10-1969. The sample when analysed by the Public Analyst, Kerala, was found adulterated as the food contained metanil yellow, a non-permitted coal-tar dye (Vide Ext. P. 6). P. W. 1 purchased the sample on 11-10-1969 and Ext. P. 6. the report of the Public Analyst, is dated 7-11-1969. However, the complaint against the respondent was filed in court only on 13-1-1970 after the lapse of more than two months. During the trial of the case, the respondent applied to the court on 23-2-1972 for sending the sample retained by P. W. 1, Food Inspector, to the Director of Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta, as...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Rice and Flour Mills and 7 ors. Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissi ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-03-1973
Reported in: [1973]32STC131(Ker)
G. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1.This original petition is filed by two firms and their partners and they seek a declaration that the provisions of Section 23(3)(a) authorising the officers of the sales tax department to retain the books, records and documents of dealers for a period of more than one month as unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(f) and (g) of the Constitution. They also pray that a writ of mandamus may be issued to the 1st respondent to return the documents and records seized by him or produced before him and covered by his receipts [exhibits P1, P1 (a) and P3] within a time to be fixed by the court.2. These two firms are carrying on the business of millers. The 1st petitioner-firm is carrying on the business of hulling of paddy and converting millets into powder. The 2nd petitioner-firm is also carrying on the business of crushing copra into coconut oil. The premises of both these firms are situated in the same compound. On 24th July, 1970, the Inspecting Assis...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›