Kerala Court June 1975 Judgments
Kesavaru Padmavathi Antharjanam Vs. Muhammed Kunju ShamsuddIn Kunju
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-30-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Ker66
Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. A S. 290 of 1971 is against the judgment of the appellate authority (Sub-Court, Pathana-mthitta) in Land Tribunal Appeal No. 5 of 1965 against the decision in O. A. 513 of 1964 of the Quilon Land Tribunal. The O. A. was filed by the appellant for fixation of fair rent. It has had a chequered career. The appellate authority, differing from the Land Tribunal, found that the respondent to this appeal was a cultivating tenant and remanded the application for fixing fair rent, the correct extent of the property and the other relevant particulars. It is against this order of the appellate authority that the writ petition, O. P. 1111 of 1973, has been preferred.2. In this writ petition the only argument raised by the petitioner is that the finding of the appellate authority was based an no evidence at all. It is impossible to agree. The appellate authority has made a detailed consideration of the evidence of P. Ws. 1 to 5 and of the D. Ws. examined in the case, and also...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer, Assessment V Vs. Smt. N.K. Sarada Thampatty
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-30-1975
Reported in: [1976]105ITR67(Ker)
Govindan Nair, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the Income-tax Officer, Assessment V, Calicut, against the judgment of Isaac J., allowing O.P. No. 4083 of 1970, quashing the assessment orders, exhibits P-2, P-3 and P-4, by which the respondent in this appeal was assessed as head of a tavazhi of a Hindu undivided family in relation to the alleged income of that Hindu undivided family for the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70. 2. The question that arises for decision in this appeal is whether an assessment of a Hindu undivided family as such which in reality had received no income at all during a particular accounting period is permissible in view of the legal fiction created by Section 171(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for short, 'the Act'.3. The facts are the following: The Nilampur Kovilagam was partitioned on November 12, 1951. The forest lands belonging to the Kovilagam were then not divided but left undivided. The tavazhi of the respondent obtained a 9/112 share in those f...
Tag this Judgment!K.C. Luckose Vs. Income-tax Officer, B-ward and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-1975
Reported in: [1976]105ITR418(Ker)
Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. After careful and anxious consideration of the interesting question of law involved in this appeal, we think the learned judge was right in his reasoning and conclusion. We have no hesitation in agreeing with the same. The appellant was assessed to income-tax for the year 1964-65. Exhibit P-1 dated January 18, 1967, is a copy of the order of assessment. It was found that the appellant had sold eight vehicles for a sum of Rs. 2,05,000 ; out of which a sum of Rs. 10,000 had to be deducted for the value of four routes as fixed in 1957-58 assessment. The sab proceeds of the vehicles alone was thus worked out at Rs. 1,93,000. From this was deducted a sum of Rs. 83,919 representing the cost of two new vehicles and the balance sale price was Rs. 1,11,081. After allowing deduction for the written down value, the profit under Section 41(2) was computed at Rs. 65,077 and the income from the vehicles at Rs. 15,470, to make up a total income of Rs. 80,547. This was rounded u...
Tag this Judgment!Balachandran Vs. Dy. Registrar of Co-operative Societies and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-1975
Reported in: (1977)ILLJ287Ker
T. Kochu Thommen, J.1. The petitioner prays for a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, direction or order, to quash Exts. PI and P2 orders. Exhibit PI was passed by the 1st respondent under Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 and Ext. P2 by the 2nd respondent under Section 82 of the Act.2. The petitioner and the 4th respondent have been and still are employees of the 3rd respondent-Co-operative Bank. By resolution No. 221 adopted by the 3rd respondent. Bank on 10-4-1970 both the petitioner and the 4th respondent were promoted as assistant accountants. By the same resolution the Bank declared that the petitioner was senior to the 4th respondent. This part of the reso ution concerning seniority gave rise to a controversy between the petitioner and the Bank on the one hand and the 4th res. pondent on the other. The 4th respondent thereupon initiated proceedings under Section 69 of the Act by filing an arbitration case before the 1st respondent, the Deputy Re...
Tag this Judgment!Kallianikutty Amma Vs. Velayudhan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-25-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Ker102
ORDERT. Chandrasekhara Menon, J. 1. The petitioner in this Original Petition challenges the validity of an order Exhibit P-l passed by the Rent Controller. Wadakkancherry under the provisions of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. holding that the first respondent's denial of the petitioner's title and right to evict him from the portion of the building described in the Rent Control Petition is bona fide and allowing the petitioner to file a suit for eviction of the respondents in the R. C. O. P. in a Civil Court. The petitioner is the landlord of the building concerned and she brought forward the Rent Control Petition alleging that the house had been orallv entrusted to the first respondent on a monthly rent of Rs. 20/-. The first respondent denied the entrustment by thepetitioner and contended that the lease was from the father of the petitioner, that there was a subseaunet oral agreement of the sale of the leasehold property to him and in pursuance of the agreement he...
Tag this Judgment!The District Collector, Ernakulam Vs. Ittiavira John and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-24-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Ker97
Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. The deed of conveyance executed by the Respondent forconsideration of Rs. 3,500/- was stamped for purpose of stamp duty under Article 21 of the Kerala Stamp Act, on the amount or value of the consideration at the rate specified in the Article. On objection being taken, to the sufficiency of the stamp duty, the Collector held that stamp duty had to be levied on the market-value of the property as assessed by the Tahsildar in his report, viz., Rs. 48,000/-. The Respondent preferred an appeal to the District Court under Section 45-A Clause (4) of the Act. The District Court took the view that the Collector's action was unjustified and his order was unsustainable having regard to the provisions of the Stamp Act, This view of the District Judge has been canvassed in this revision petition.2. We may usefully extract Articles 21, 22, 29 and 31 of the Stamp Act, which read as follows:'21. Conveyance as defined by section 2 (d), other than a conveyance specified in No. 22...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnankutty Vs. Senior Supt. of Post Offices and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-23-1975
Reported in: (1976)ILLJ175Ker
K.K. Narendran, J.1. The petitioner in this Original Petition, who was a postman in the Posts and Telegraphs department from 1961 onwards was dismissed from service under Rule 19(i) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (for short, the Rules) consequent on his conviction on a criminal charge. The question that arises for consideration is whether the conduct which has led to his conviction should be a conduct in the course of his employment to attract Rule 19(i) of the Rules, The petitioner joined the Posts and Telegraphs department as a messenger in the year 1951 and from 19G1 onwards he was working as a permanent postman. The 1st respondent-Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Ernakulam Division by Ext. P1 order dated 1-5-1971 removed the petitioner from service with effect from 30-4-1971. Ext. P1 was issued by the 1st respondent in exercise of the powers conferred upon him by Rule 19(i) of the Rules because the petitioner was convicted on a ...
Tag this Judgment!Advocate General Vs. Abraham George
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-23-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ158
P. Subramonian Poti, J.1. This is a petition moved under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. by the Advocate General pf the State charging the respondent with having committed contempt of this Court The respondent, one Abraham George, was the second defendant in O. S. 81 of 1959 of the Alleppy Sub Court. The suit came to this Court in appeal A. S. 176 of 1970. The appeal was heard by a Division Bench of this Court consisting of the Honourable Mr. Justice T. S. Krishnamurthy Iyer and Honourable Mr. Justice N. D. P, Nam-baodirrpad. Judgment was delivered on 10-11-1972 dismissing the appeal. On 20-11-1972 the respondent addressed the Chief Justice of the High Court of Kerala by a Petition incorporating allegations against the Judges who decided the appeal A. S. 1976/1970. These allegations are said to scandalise the High Court. The petition sent to the Chief Justice is filed along with the petition of the Advocate General, marked Ext. P-l. Reference is made particularly to the...
Tag this Judgment!M.M. Nagalinga Nadar and Sons Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-20-1975
Reported in: [1975]36STC177(Ker)
K. Bhaskaran, J.1. In this revision under Section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (15 of 1963), the question of law for decision raised by the petitioner-assessee is :Whether the value of containers (packing materials-tins) separately shown in the bills and invoices is liable to be included in the taxable turnover of the assessee and liable to sales tax.2. The petitioner-firm is a registered dealer in coconut oil at Quilon in Kerala State. Most of the petitioner's transactions are stated to be inter-State sales covered by C forms issued by the sales tax department. Since the oil cannot be despatched to far-off places outside the State by rail or road without proper packing, tins are utilised for that purpose. The petitioner also incurs labour charges for packing. The value of the containers (tins) and packing charges are shown separately in the petitioner's accounts, bills and invoices.3. For the assessment year 1966-67 an amount of Rs. 1,75,839 was shown separately as the...
Tag this Judgment!Chairman, CochIn Dock Labour Board Vs. P.J. George and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-20-1975
Reported in: (1976)IILLJ65Ker
P. Subramonian Poti, J.1. Sri T.J. George, the first respondent in this appeal sustained an injury as a result of an accident on 10-9-1969. He was wounded on his left leg and it had to be amputated above the knee. The accident occurred when the 1st respondent was returning from his work in the Willingdon Island. He was crossing over to Mattancherry in a rowing boat (Mutchwa) when a water transport boat collided with the rowing boat. He was on duty in the Willingdon Island between 6 p.m. and 3 a.m. on the relevant date and the accident took place some time just after the duty hours. At that time for cross over to the mainland the only conveyance available to Sri George was the Mutchwa and he availed of it. He, like the other employees, was being paid 20 paise as expenses for cross over from the Island to the mainland. The workman who sustained the injury as a result of the accident moved the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation for payment of compensation for loss of earning capacity...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »