Kerala Court August 1978 Judgments
Acharu Vs. Rappai and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-31-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ker34
K. Bhaskaran, J. 1. The reference order passed by the learned single Judge, before whom the second appeal came up for hearing in the first instance, reads as follows : 'The principal question involved in the appeal concerns the interpretation of Section 31 and some other connected provisions of the Cochin Christian Succession Act. The question is very important and of wide application and I think that it is best it is considered by a Bench. I am therefore referring the appeal for a decision by a Division Bench', The matter is now before us as the Division Bench in its turn has referred it to a Full Bench, 'in view of the importance of the question raised.' 2. The first defendant in the suit O. S. No. 164 of 1966 on the file of the Munsiffs Court, Trinjalakuda. is the appellant in the second appeal. The suit was one instituted by the 1st respondent herein, as plaintiff, for partition of the immovable properties described in the A and B Schedules, and the movable properties described in ...
Tag this Judgment!Anantharaman Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-30-1978
Reported in: (1979)ILLJ438Ker
Khalid, J.1. The petitioner seeks to quash Ext. P6 order of suspension passed by the 1st respondent in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-rule (1) of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, hereinafter referred to as the Rules, and also Ext. P5 memorandum by which he was asked to show cause against the proposal to impose a penalty of dismissal from service. The first respondent is the Union of India and the 2nd respondent, the Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Cochin. The petitioner entered service as a Lower Division Clerk attached to the Customs House, Madras, on 9-8-1946. On 5-6-1973 he was promoted and appointed as Senior Grade Preventive Officer. From April, 1952 he has been in the Customs House, Cochin. By order dated 24-2-1975, Ext. P1, the Additional Collector of Customs placed the petitioner under suspension with effect from 24-2-1975, in exercise of the powers conferred by Rule 10 of the rules. In October, 1975 an en...
Tag this Judgment!Kerala Public Service Commission Vs. P. Parameswaran Nair and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-30-1978
Reported in: (1979)ILLJ426Ker
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. This batch of eases--a writ appeal and three writ petitions--were heard together, as they raised a rather tricky question in regard to the construction of a service rule and its inter relationship to certain connected rules. The Rule is now embodied as Rule 28(bbb) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, and prior to the said Rule, in certain Government proceedings and Government orders. The fight is not over the right to promotion--both the petitioners and the respondents have been promoted--but to the assignment of ranks and seniority and (dates of regularisation in the promoted grade. The main arguments were advanced in O.P. No. 785 of 1974, the facts of which may be noticed.2. O.P. 785 of 1974: The petitioners and respondents 2 to 48 in this writ petition commenced service as Grade II Assistants in the Office of the Public Service Commission. Para 2(iii) of the petition sets out the petitioner's claim to seniority over the respondents. Exhi...
Tag this Judgment!Dy. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Ernakulam Vs. Raja Oil Mills and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-28-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ker99; [1979]43STC78(Ker)
Chandrasekhara Menon, J.1. These Tax Revision Cases have come before us on a reference made by a Division Bench of this court by order dated 23-3-1978. As the questions that arise for consideration are the same in all these Tax Revision Cases, where the Revenue is the Revision petitioner, we would refer to the facts in T. R. C. No. 74 of 1977 and deal with the questions raised, in that case.2. The assessee-respondent are dealers in copra, coconuts etc. In respect of the assessment year 1971-72 amongst others, a turnover of Rs. 2,07,780.53 representing value of gunny bags purchased from sundry persons and used for packing the coconuts and copra sold inter-State was brought to tax under Section 5A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The assesses claimed exemption under Section 5A (c) of the Act. The assessing authority as well as the appellate authority found that what was sold inter-State was only copra and there was no sale of gunny bags whic...
Tag this Judgment!Madras Rubber Factory Vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise and or ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-25-1978
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT595(Ker)
V. Khalid, J.1. The petitioner is the Madras Rubber Factory Ltd., a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, having its registered office at Madras, engaged in the business of manufacturing automobile tubes, treed rubber with cushion, treed rubber without cushion, and other products. The reliefs prayed are:'(a) to declare the provisions of Section 4 (1) to (3) of the new section of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 as revised by the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1973 (22 of 1973) as ultra vires of Section 3 of the Act and beyond the competence of Parliament;(b) by a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction ororder, quash the orders of the first respondent Exts. P 2, P 2 (a), P 2 (b), and P 2 (c);(c) to direct the first respondent to accept the value claimed by the petitioner-company, viz., manufacturing cost and manufacturing profit in the price-lists Exhibits P 1, P 1 (a), P 1 (b) and P 1 (c);(d) to stay the collection of excise duty on the goods of th...
Tag this Judgment!Kavitha Movie House Vs. M.A. Abdul Khader and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-21-1978
Reported in: (1980)IILLJ24Ker
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. These two writ appeals are by the owner of the 'Kavitha Movie House', one of the well-known cinema houses of this city. The appellant had conducted an enquiry against two of the gate-keepers employed by it in respect of a certain misconduct alleged against them and a charge in respect thereof. The charge - to state it with reference to the facts in W.A. 174/77-- was that a complaint was received from M/s. Thirumeni Pictures, distributors of films, that on the 10th January, 1974, for a matinee show of the picture 'Jesus' in the Kavitha Theatre only 65 numbers of middle circle tickets of Rs. 1.50 each, were issued in the gent's side, and that when their representative counted the number of persons in the above class, it was found that the number was seven in excess of the number of tickets issued; that on-the-spot enquiries revealed that at the instance of Sri Srinivasan three persons were admitted to the middle circle by Abdul khader who was in charge of the mid...
Tag this Judgment!P.M. Nianan and ors. Vs. the Executive Officer, Anikad and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-16-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ker18; 1979CriLJ372
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J. 1. These writ petitions challenge the vires of Rule 10 of the Kerala Food Adulteration Rules. In respect of the contravention of the said Rule, there was a criminal prosecution of the petitioners in these writ petitions. The validity of the Rule was canvassed in revision proceedings before this Court under Section 482 of the Cr. P. C. The Rule was upheld -- vide Gopinathan Nair v. Executive Officer, Anikkad (1975 Ker LT 549) : (1976 Cri LJ 171). These writ petitions are now filed to declare the Rules ultra vires.2. The learned Advocate-General placed before us the decision of this Court reported in 1975 Ker LT 549 : (1976 Cri LJ 171). He also cited the Supreme Court decision in Shankar Ramchandra Abhyankar v. Krishnaji Dattatraya Bapat, (AIR 1970 SC 1) where it was ruled by the Supreme Court that where on the revisional jurisdiction, the High Court dismisses the revision after hearing both the parties, the order of the appellate court becomes merged with the orde...
Tag this Judgment!Balakrishnan Nambiyar and ors. Vs. Kanakathidathil Madhavan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-16-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ker40
Chandrasekhara Menon, J. 1. These cases have come up before the Full Bench on a reference by a Division Bench of this court (Balakrishna Eradi and Balaganga-dharan Nair, JJ.) wherein the correctness of the decision of a previous Division Bench ruling of this Court in Sabapathy Pillai v. Special Tahsildar (1970 Ker LT 1015) was doubted. 2. The appeals have been filed by different claimants against the decision of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Tellicherry in a batch of connected reference made to that court under Section 32 of the Kerala Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called 'the Act') concerning apportionment of the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer in respect of certain large extents of land acquired for the purpose of Aralam Seed Farm. At the hearing of the appeals, objection was taken on behalf of the State by the learned Advocate-General as also by some of the counsel appearing for the party respondents regarding the court-fee paid on the memorandum of appeals...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rowther Brothers
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-16-1978
Reported in: [1979]119ITR353(Ker)
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has sent up a statement of the case and referred the following question of law for our opinion, viz. :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and particularly in view of the finding that the assessee consciously and deliberately concealed particulars of its income and deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars thereof and further that the Explanation to Section 271(1)(c) applied to this case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in cancelling the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?'2. The assessee was doing business in foodgrains, tobacco and rubber. The assessment year with which we are concerned is 1969-70, the accounting year being the financial year 1968-69 ending with 31st March, 1969. On an examination of the accounts, the ITO found two credits in the folio opened for M/s. Kottayam Rubber Company to the following effect :Rs. (1) 9-12-19...
Tag this Judgment!T.S. Govindarajulu Naidu Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-16-1978
Reported in: [1979]43STC233(Ker)
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. These tax revision cases are concerned with the assessment to sales tax passed on the revision petitioner for the years 1972-73 and 1973-74. The assessee is a dealer in synthetic gems. The assessee purchases the gems locally and sells them in Tiruchi and other places outside the State. For purchases and sales thus made by the assessee he was made liable under Section 5A of the Act. The provisions of the said section may be read :5 A. Levy of purchase tax.-(I) Every dealer who in the course of his business purchases from a registered dealer or from any other person any goods, the sale or purchase of which is liable to tax under this Act, in circumstances in which no tax is payable under Section 5, and either-(a) consumes such goods in the manufacture of other goods for sale or otherwise; or(b) disposes of such goods in any manner other than by way of sale in the State; or(c) despatches them to any place outside the State except as a direct result of sale or purc...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »