Kerala Court August 1977 Judgments
Joseph Abraham Vs. Ouseph Eapen and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-31-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Ker36
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. This appeal is by the plaintiff against the final decree in a suit for partition of his one-fourth share of an extent of nearly 88 acres of paddy land. The Jenm right in the same belongs to Karinganampalli of Nedumprath palace. There was an otti to four sisters--, one Bhagirathi (deceased), and defendants 13 to 15. Each of them was entitled to an undivided 1/4th share. Bhageerathi's legal representatives are defendants 10 and 11. On 4-11-1121 M. E. Ext. P-1 pattom chit was executed by the 1st defendant and one deceased Ouseph (represented by his legal representatives, defendants 2 to 8) to defendants 10 and 13, representing all the four co-owners. This was in respect of the entire 88 acres. Defendant 1 died pending suit and the legal representatives are defendants 9 and 16 to 19. By Ext. D-8 dated 17-4-1952 there was a division for convenience of enjoyment among the lessees. The 1st defendant was put in possession of the western half of an extent of nearly 44 a...
Tag this Judgment!N. Mohammed Kutty Vs. High Court of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-31-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Ker55; (1978)ILLJ333Ker
Gopalan Nambiyab, C.J.1. The case was referred to a Full Bench by a Division Bench of myself and Balagangadharan Nair J. as we doubted the correctness of the view taken by Mathew J. of this Court (as he then was) in O. P. 1846 of 1968 (Ker) which was confirmed by a Division Bench in W. A. No. 949 of 1969 (Ker).2. The petitioner is an allotted Officer from the Madras State governed by the Madras Judicial Ministerial Service Rules, and entitled to protection under Section 115 of the States Reorganisation Act, viz., his conditions of service shall not be varied to his prejudice or disadvantage except with the previous approval of the Central Government. He entered service on 1-8-1954 in the Malabar area of the Madras State which after reorganisation of States became part of Kerala. Respondents 4 to 7 are also allotted Officers and members of the same service who joined prior to the petitioner. Rule 22 of the Madras Judicial Ministerial Services Rules provides;'22. Test or examination to b...
Tag this Judgment!New Street Oil Mills Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-31-1977
Reported in: [1978]41STC36(Ker)
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J. 1. These four tax revision cases under Section 41 of the General Sales Tax Act, 1963, are by the same assessee against assessments to sales tax for the years 1966-67, 1967-68, 1969-70 and 1968-69, respectively. The assessments were on best of judgment under Section 17 of the Act after issuing the requisite pre-assessment notices on the ground that the assessee did not produce accounts despite several notices to do so. The documents and records stated to have been seized on search of the assessee's premises were relied on ; and, in the light of these records, the taxable turnovers reported by the assessee for the years in question were enhanced and revised as follows :Assessment yearReported taxable turnoverEnhanced or revised turnover123Rs.Rs.1966-671,21,030.2511,92,592.541967-682,16,299.5510,99,199.061969-702,94,433.9911,99,024.001968-6999,507.1011,55,120.002. Counsel for the petitioner stressed this phenomenal increase from the reported turnover to the revised ...
Tag this Judgment!South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. Joseph Michael
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-19-1977
Reported in: [1978]48CompCas368(Ker)
Kochu Thommen, J.1. These appeals arise from the judgment of a learned judge of this court in B.C.P. Nos. 2 to 13 and 15 to 17 of 1975. The learned judge disposed of the 15 petitions by a common judgment on the basis of the facts is B.C.P. No. 2 of 1975 as all the other petitions arose in identical circumstances and related to a common question. It iswith reference to B.C.P. No. 2 of 1975 that we propose to dispose of all the fifteen appeals by this common judgment.2. The appellant is a banking company having its registered office at Trichur, and we shall refer to it as the 'company. ' The 1st respondent (who was the petitioner in the B.C.P.) is a transferee of shares from the 2nd respondent and we shall respectively refer to them as the 'transferee' and ' transferor '.3. The case of the transferee is that he purchased 210 equity shares from the transferor on 22nd January, 1975, for a consideration of Rs. 10,000 and forwarded to the company the share transfer deed duly executed by the ...
Tag this Judgment!inspector of Central Excise, M.O.R. and anr. Vs. Goods Shephered Rubbe ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-18-1977
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT471(Ker)
1. The learned Judge quashed Ext. P3 series of assessment memoranda issued by the Central Excise Officer-in-charge, calling upon the writ petitioner-respondent to make goods the deficit duty that was payable in respect of the goods indicated. The notices follow almost exactly the same pattern and for the sake of convenience we may reproduce Ex. P3-A.'ASSESSMENT MEMORANDUM (Strike out the portions which are not applicable)1. The assessee has paid the duty on the above goods correctly except to the extent indicated below.The duty short levied as indicated below should be paid by the assessee with in ten days in his account current (P.L.A.)(Sd.)Signature and stamp of Central Excise Officer-in-charge Place : PalghatDate : 10.3.1970Cushion compound used in the factory for the manufacture of Cushion backing Tread Rubber is dutiable. A quantity of 1885-700 Kgs. of Cushion Compound have been used in the factory during September 1969 for the manufacture of Cushion backed tread rubber.Value of 1...
Tag this Judgment!Sales Tax Officer and anr. Vs. C.C. Transport Co.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-17-1977
Reported in: [1977]40STC594(Ker)
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. We think this appeal should succeed, as it is directly covered in by more than one decision of the Supreme Court and by a Division Bench ruling of this Court. The writ petitioner whose writ petition was allowed by a learned Judge, was assessed to sales tax by exhibit PI order dated 22nd March, 1967. Exemption was granted in respect of a sum of a little over Rs. 80,000, representing accommodation sales. The Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax exercised his suo motu power of revision under Section 35 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, which enables him to call for any order passed by any officer or authority below that of an Inspecting Assistant Commissioner and pass such orders thereon as he thinks fit. This revisional power is under Sub-section (2) of Section 35, subject to three limitations one of which is that it shall not be exercised if more than four years have expired after passing of the order sought to be revised. In pursuance of his decision to exe...
Tag this Judgment!Sales Tax Officer Vs. C. C. Transport Co.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-17-1977
Reported in: (1978)6CTR(Ker)116
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J. - We think this appeal should succeed, as it is directly covered in by more than one decisions of the Supreme Court and by a Division Bench ruling of this Court. The writ petitioner whose writ petition was allowed by a learned Judge, was assessed to sales-tax by Ext. P.1 order dated 22-3-1967. Exemption was granted in respect of a sum of little over Rs. 80,000/-representing accommodation sales. The Deputy Commissioner of Sales-tax exercised his suo motu power of revision u/s. 35 of the Kerala General Sales-tax Act which enables him to call for any order passed by any Officer or Authority below that of an Inspecting Asstt. Commissioner and pass such orders thereof as he thinks fit. This revisional power is under sub-sec. (2) of S. 35 subject to three limitations one of which is that it shall not be exercised if more than four years have been expired after passing of the order sought to be revised. In pursuance of its decision to exercise the revisional power, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Neelakantanachari Velayudhanachari and anr. Vs. Kerala State Road Tran ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-11-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Ker24
Kochu Thommen, J. 1. This appeal is from the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Kottayam, in O.S. No. 46 of 1971. The appellants are the plaintiffs in a suit for damages arising on account of the death of their two children and their personal injuries and loss which were alleged to have been caused by the wrongful act of the defendants. The suit was decreed, but not in terms of the plaint as the court below awarded only part of the damages claimed. Hence the present appeal.2. The 1st plaintiff is the husband of the 2nd plaintiff. On the night of 24-1-1969 the couple were walking back home along the Athirampuzha-Ettumanoor road with their daughter Vijayam (aged 12) and son Vikraman (aged 11) after seeing the fireworks at the Athirampuzha church. As they reached Uppupurakkal junction, bus No, KLT 8764 belonging to the 1st defendant and driven by the 2nd defendant suddenly hit them. Both the children died instantaneously and the parents were seriously injured. The learned trial...
Tag this Judgment!Ateesee (Agro-industrial Trading Corporation) Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-10-1977
Reported in: [1978]41STC1(Ker)
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. tax revision cases relate to the claim for exemption from sales tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, in respect of the turnover on sales of 'P.V.C. cloth' (Rexine). T.R.C. No. 61 of 1976 relates to the year 1971-72 and the claim is in respect of an amount of Rs. 1,33,840.34; T. R. C. No. 62 of 1976 is in respect of 1972-73 and the claim is for Rs. 1,56,181.04. The genesis and the statutory background of the claim is as follows :Under Article 286(3) of the Constitution of India:Any law of a State shall, in so far as it imposes, or authorises the imposition of, a tax on the sale or purchase of goods declared by Parliament by law to be of special importance in inter-State trade or commerce, be subject to such restrictions and conditions in regard to the system of levy, rates and other incidents of the tax as Parliament may by law specify.In accordance with the above constitutional provision, the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, was passed by Parliame...
Tag this Judgment!Agro-industrial Trading Corporation Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-10-1977
Reported in: 1988(38)ELT618(Ker)
V.P. Gopaian Nambiyar, C.J.1. These Tax Revision Cases relate to the claim for exemption from Sales Tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, in respect of the turnover on sales of 'P.V.C. cloth' (Rexine), T.R.C. No. 61 of 1976 relates to the year 1971-72, and the claim is in respect of an amount of Rs. 1,33,840.34; T.R.C. No. 62 of 1976 is in respect of 1972-73 and the claim is for Rs. 1,56,181.04. The genesia and the statutory background of the claim is as follows:-Under Article 286(3) of the Constitution of India. 'Any law of a state shall, in so far as it imposes, or authorises the imposition of, a tax on the sale or purchase of goods declares by parliament by law to be of special importance in inter-state trade or commerce, be subject to such restrictions and conditions in regard to the system of levy, rates and other Incidents of the tax a Parliament may be law specify'. In accordance with the above constitutional provision, the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, was passed by ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »