Kerala Court January 1976 Judgments
Appu Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-29-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ker78
George Vadakkel, J.1. This appeal is by the claimant in the lower court. He is the jenmi of 1 acre (according to him 1 acre and 39 cents) of garden land acquired by the respondent-State for the purpose of constructing a railway siding to the Gwalior Rayons at West Hill in Kozhikode. The Sy. No. of the land acquired is T. S. No. 43 of Katcheri Village, Kozhikode Taluk. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at Rs. 220/- per cent and on an apportionment of the compensation payable in respect of the acquired land awarded Rs. 14,000/- to him. The claimant requested for reference to the civil court as provided for in Section 20 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1961, claiming land value at the rate of Rs. 1000/- per cent. The lower court dismissed the reference on two grounds, viz. that the statement filed by the claimant in answer to notice under Section 9 (3) did not specify the amount of compensation claimed by him, and that even on merits the claimant failed to substantiate his cl...
Tag this Judgment!Cheriyan Vs. Kristhu Raja Janasahayam Sangham and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-27-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ker82
Bhaskaran, J.1. C. M. A. No. 171 of 1975 arises out of LA. No. 875 of 1974 in O. S. No. 147 of 1974 on the file of the Sub-Court of Parur and C. M. A. No. 173 of 1975 arises out of I. A. No. 1148 of 1975 in O. S. No. 148 of 1974 on the file of the Sub-Court. Parur, both suits between the same parties. The appellant is the 1st defendant in the suit and 1st counter-petitioner in the petitions. The suits were for recovery of amounts secured by hypothecation bonds. In each of these suits two petitions were filed; one for attachment, before judgment, of five items of properties not included in the hypothecation bonds, and therefore not included in the schedule of properties to the plaint, they being not subject-matter of the suit; and the other for appointment of a receiver for managing the properties described in the schedule to the plaint as well as the properties sought to be attached before judgment.2. After the coming into force of Act XXX of 1975, the appellant seems tohave filed a pe...
Tag this Judgment!Official Liquidator, Palghat Metal Industries Co. Ltd. Vs. the Asst. C ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-23-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)225
ORDERV. Khalid, J. - The Palghat Metal Industries Company Ltd., was ordered to be wound up by an order of this Court dated 4-7-1966. The company was assessed to sales-tax by the Sales Tax Officer, Special Circle, Palghat, for the assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1964-65, on the basis of best judgment assessment as per his order dated 25-12-1965. The company preferred appeals before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax, Palghat, on 5-8-1966. The appeals were decided on favour of the company by order dated 7-8-1969 by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. He set aside the original order and remanded the case to the Sales Tax Officer for fresh disposal.2. Thereafter fresh returns were filed for the aforesaid years by the official liquidator. The assessment was completed by the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) Special Circle, Palghat, as per his order dated 31-7-1974. As per this order, the company had to pay an amount of Rs. 9,681.98 toward...
Tag this Judgment!Radhakrishna Menon Vs. Village Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-22-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ker19
ORDERK.K. Narendran, J.1. The petitioner in this original petition was a junior member of a Marumakkathayam tarwad who was put in charge of the management of the properties as a stop-gap arrangement in view of Ext. P-4 karar, entered into between the members of the tarwad, for partition. The grievance of the petitioner is against Exts. P-1, P-3 and P-6 orders insisting that the petitioner should measure the levy in respect of the tarwad properties. The question that arises for consideration is as to what is the effect of an agreement between the members of the tarwad for dividing the tarwad properties and whether there will be a severance of the joint family status from the date of agreement or the same will be postponed to the actual division of the properties by metes and bounds. If there is a severance of the joint family status from the date of the karar, it goes without saying that the petitioner who was only a member of the tarwad cannot be asked to measure levy in respect of any...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesan Vs. Kunhipalu and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-21-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ker119
Narayana Pillai, J.1. The question raised here relates to attachment of an item of immovable property. It is said that copy of the order of attachment was not affixed in the concerned Municipal Office as required by Order XXI, Rule 54 (2) of the Civil Procedure Code. The matter arose in execution and this way: On resistance offered by the respondents who are purchasers of the property from the judgment-debtor, after the decree, which was one for money, the appellant who purchased the property from the decree-holder-auction purchaser applied For delivery of possession of it after removal of obstruction. Resistance offered was mainly on the ground that the court-sale was invalidbecause there was no proper attachment. The attachment was one made before judgment but made absolute on the date of the decree. The subordinate Judge, Trichur, before whom the objection regarding attachment was raised overruled it but it found favour with the Additional District Judge, Trichur. who heard the appe...
Tag this Judgment!G. Gopinathan Nair and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-14-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ker36
Balakrishna Eradi, J.1. These writ petitions raise common questions concerning the validity of Section 80 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and Rules 182 to 200 and Appendix III of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) framed under the aforesaid section.2. The petitioner in O. P. No. 4228 of 1973 is a Co-operative Society carrying on banking business in the name and style the Thiruvalla East Co-operative Bank Limited No. 3260. O. P. No. 926 of 1974 is a writ petition filed by a shareholder of the aforementioned Co-operative Society. The petitioners in O. P. No. 4420 of 1973 are four employees of the Kerala State Co-operative Bank Ltd., Trivan-drum.3. By the impugned Rules framed under Section 80 of the Act, Government have classified the Co-operative Societies according to their type and financial position in the manner shown in Appendix III, prescribed the staff pattern to be adopted by Societies belo...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. C.P. Adam
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-09-1976
Reported in: [1976]105ITR465(Ker)
Kochu Thommen, J.1. The assessee is a timber merchant and a coupe contractor at Pallikandy, Calicut. The assessment year is 1964-65. The following questions have been referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala:'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in deleting Rs. 90,000 out of theaddition of Rs. 1,35,000 made by the Income-tax Officer as income from unexplained cash credits in the name of the assessee in his assessment for 1964-65 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Appellate Tribunal that the department had examined previously the two persons whom the assessee wanted to examine, is supported by any material ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee has discharged the onus of proof in respect of the a...
Tag this Judgment!Regional Deputy Director of Public Instruction, Ernakulam Vs. K.K. Vas ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-08-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ker129
Govindan Nair, C.J.1. This appeal is from the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court allowing O.P. No. 4639 of 1969 (Ker). That petition prayed for the quashing of two orders Exts. P5 and P7 produced along with the Original Petition, passed respectively by the 3rd respondent, the Assistant Educational Officer, Mala, and by the 1st respondent the Regional Deputy Director of public Instruction, in the petition, Ext. P5 stated that the petitioner in the Original Petition, a Craft Teacher, the respondent herein, is entitled only to a consolidated pay of Rs. 110/-. Having said so, the following direction had been issued:'The Headmaster will draw up a statement in the following from (form?) and forward to this office within 3 days. (a)Pay due from 1.6.86monthPayD.A.Total(b)Fay drawn from 1.6.68dodododo(c)Excess drawn to berefunded.dodododo The excess drawn should be recovered from the teacher at once and details ofcredit. The Service book is herewith returned.' Ext. P 5 communicati...
Tag this Judgment!Kerala Polythene Industries Vs. Supreintendent of Central Excise, Triv ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-07-1976
Reported in: (1976)5CTR(Ker)221
Balakrishna Eradi, J. - The petitioner before us is a firm engaged in the business of manufacture of Polythence Lay Flat Tubings. By Notification No. 59/64 issued by the Central Government Polythene Lay Flat Tubings were exempted from levy of excise duty with effect from 1-3-1964. The said exemption was subsequently withdrawn by a Notification No. 101/70 dated 1-5-1970 issued by the Government of India in the Ministry of finance. Shortly thereafter, the product aforementioned was again exempted from payment of excise duty by another Notification dated 17-7-1970. The resulting position wast that during the intervening period between 1-5-1970 and 17-7-1970 Polythene Lay Flat Tubings were assessable to duty under tariff Item 15A (2). Apparently because of ignorance regarding the withdrawal of the exemption as per the Notification dated 1-5-1970 the petitioner-firm which was enjoying the facility of self removal procedure had not credited to the Department the excise duty payable in respec...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of Travancore Vs. May C. George
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-05-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Ker8
Bhaskaran, J. 1. The State Bank of Travancore, the decree-holder in the suit, is the appellant; the judgment-debtors are the Respondents. The respondents as defendants in the suit, pleaded inter alia that they were entitled to the benefits of the Kerala Agriculturists Debt Relief Act, Act XI of 1970 (for short the Act). The trial Court accepted the contention of the defendants and granted the relief as prayed for by them. What has been stated in paragraph 22 of the judgment reads as follows: 'Now we come-to the question as to the benefits of Act XI of 1970 to which the defendants are entitled. The debt is due to a banking company and it exceeds Rs. 3,000/- and so the number of half yearly instalments in which the debt shall be repaid is eight, because of the proviso (a) to Section 4(2) and the interest payable will be at 7 per cent per annum because of Section 5(2) of the Act. These are the benefits to which the defendants are entitled to under Act XI of 1970.' 2. Though in the memoran...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »