Kerala Court August 1977 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Keraleeya Ayurveda Samajam Hospital and Nursing Home Vs. Workmen and o ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-10-1977
Reported in: (1979)ILLJ115Ker
Chandrasekhara Menon, J.1. In this case I had delivered the judgment on 16th March, 1977, dismissing the O.P., on the basis of the decision of the Supreme Court in Workmen, J.S. Institution v. I.S. Institution : (1976)ILLJ33SC . I might state here that I had not the advantage of hearing the counsel for the petitioner at that time, before the above judgment was dictated and subsequently signed by me. It was brought to my notice by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that he was absent when the case was taken up as he was engaged in another Court, and in the circumstances he requested that the matter be reheard. Therefore, I posted the case for being spoken to and the matter was reheard. Though I am taking the same view now which I had taken earlier, it would only be proper that I revise my judgment so that all the points urged by the learned Counsel is dealt with therein. 2. The question raised in this original petition is whether the Keraleeya Ayurveda Samajam Hospital and Nursing H...
The Assistant Sales Tax Officer Vs. B. C. Kame, Prop., Kame Photo Stud ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-10-1977
Reported in: (1978)6CTR(Ker)0067A
Khanna, J. - Whether sales tax is payable by a photographer under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (Act 2 of 1959) when the photographer takes photographs or does other photographic work and thereafter supplies the photographic prints to his client or customer is the question which arises for determination in this appeal on certificate against the judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court reported in 28 S.T.C. 1. The High Court answered the question in the negative in favour of the assessee respondent.2. The respondent is the proprietor of Kame Photo Studio. He has apart from his main shop two branches. He carries on business, inter alia, of buying and selling photographic goods. After buying photographic goods he either sells them to his customers or uses them in three ways - (1) in taking photographs and supplying prints thereof, (2) in making enlargements for the clients who bring their own negatives, and (3) in preparing positive prints of the same size from the negatives broug...
Neelakantha Pillai Ramachandran Nair Vs. Ayyappan Pillai Kumara Pillai
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-08-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Ker152
Balakrishna Eradi, J. 1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against an order passed by the 1st Addl. Munsiff, Neyyattinkara allowing I. A. No. 2689 of 1975 filed by the plaintiff in O. S. No. 2522 of 1968 of his court under Order 1, Rule 10. Civil P. C. for impleading the revision petitioner herein as an additional defendant in the suit. The suit O. S. No. 2522 of 1968 has been filed by the respondent herein for redemption of a mortgage of 1104. That suit was instituted on 20-12-1968. Prior thereto, the plaintiff had issued a notice of suit to the defendant on 10-12-1968 to which there was noreply. It would now appear that subsequent to the receipt of the said notice and just two days prior to the institution of the suit, the defendant-mortgagee had executed a document dated 18-12-1968 purporting to transfer his mortgage right in favour of the revision petitioner. The plaintiff however was kept in the dark about this. The result was that the suit was filed with the original mortg...
Karunagappilly Taluk Cashewnut Workers' Union Vs. Minerva Cashew Co. ( ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-08-1977
Reported in: (1978)IILLJ244Ker
Chandrasekhara Menon, J.1. The award of the Industrial Tribunal, Alleppey in respect of the dispute between the management of M/s. Minerva Cashew Co. (P) Ltd., Quilon and their workmen represented by the petitioner-union and by other trade unions is impugned in this original petition. The Cashew Company concerned is the first respondent, the other trade unions who were parties to the dispute respondents 2 to 7 and the Industrial Tribunal, the 8th respondent in this petition. Exhibit P1 is a copy of the award under attack. The reference of the dispute to the Tribunal was on the basis of a memorandum of settlement arrived at between the management and the union in conciliation proceedings under the auspices of the District Labour Officer, Quilon. The terms of the settlement were drawn up on 28-2-1971 and the same had been produced before Tribunal. A copy of the same is marked in this proceedings as Ext. R1 filed along with the counter-affidavit filed by the 1st respondent. For a batter u...
Premier Tyres Ltd. Vs. V.A. Abraham and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-04-1977
Reported in: (1978)IILLJ177Ker
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of a learned Judge of this Court dismissing O.P. No. 1652 of 1973, filed to quash the award Ext. P1 of the Industrial Tribunal, Calicut. The issue referred for adjudication to the Tribunal was the termination of service of Shri V. A. Abraham. The case of the employer was that the termination was a plain case of action simpliciter under Standing Order 3 (marked as Ext. W 9) before the Tribunal and not a case of punitive action of termination for misconduct. The Tribunal found in effect that it was really the latter, and not a case of innocuous termination under the provisions of the standing orders. Therefore, by Ext. P1 award, it directed the management to pay substantial compensation in lieu of reinstatement, namely, two months' wages for each completed year of service, or any part thereof in excess of six months.2. In paragraph 16 of its award, the Tribunal discussed the contention of the management that the order o...
Nanikutty Amma Devaki Amma and ors. Vs. Krishnan Kochunarayanan Nair a ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-03-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Ker3
ORDERG. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. The plaintiffs in a suit for partition are the revision petitioners. The suit was filed in 1969. Pending suit some of the plaint schedule properties were acquired under the Land Acquisition Act for some public purpose. Thereafter the plaint was amended so as to include a prayer for declaration of the plaintiffs' right to a share in the compensation amount. Some of the defendants had filed a written statement to the original plaint in which one of the contentions was that proper court-fee has not been paid for the plaint. But this contention was not pressed for consideration either before or after the amendment of the plaint. Both parties let in evidence on the issues raised on the pleadings and the case was posted for final hearing. One of the issues raised in the case was whether the court-fee paid is not sufficient. After the final hearing the learned Munsiff entered a finding on this issue alone by holding that the valuation .for the purpose of court-fe...
Paul Lazar Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-02-1977
Reported in: [1977]40STC437(Ker)
T. Kochu Thommen, J.1. The only question which arises in this tax revision case is whether copper wire is a component part of electrical transformers. The Sales Tax Officer held that it was not and his decision was confirmed in appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as well as by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal.2. The assessee is a dealer in copper wires and other goods. He sells copper wires to the Indian Transformers Ltd., Alwaye. It is not disputed that these wires are used by the buyers in the process of manufacturing transformers. During the assessment year 1966-67, the assessee sold copper wires for a total sum of Rs. 1,75,843.82 to the Indian Transformers Ltd. and furnished to the department declarations in form 18 for the purpose of availing himself of the concessional rate of 1 per cent in terms of Sub-section (3) of Section 5 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, for short, the Act. We shall read Sub-section (3):(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-sect...
Paul Lazar Vs. State of KeralA.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-02-1977
Reported in: (1978)6CTR(Ker)0146B
Kochu Thommen, J. - The only question which arises in this Tax Revision Case is whether copper wire is a component part of electrical transformers. The Sales Tax Officer held that it was not, and his decision was confirmed in appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as well as by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal.2. The assessee is a dealer in copper wires and other goods. He sells copper wires to the Indian Transformers Ltd., Alwaye. It is not disputed that these wires are used by the buyers in the process of manufacturing transformers. During the assessment year 1966-67 the assessee sold copper wires for a total sum of Rs. 1,75,843.82 to the Indian Transformers Ltd., and furnished to the department declarations in Form 18 for the purpose of availing himself of the concessional rate of 1% in terms of sub-S. (3) of S. 5 of the Kerala General Sales-tax Act, 1963, for short, the Act. We shall read sub-section (3) :'(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-S. (1) or sub-S. (2) t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›