Kerala Court November 1981 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.
Keethadath Abdulkhader Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-06-1981
Reported in: (1982)28CTR(Ker)317; [1983]140ITR91(Ker)
Bhaskaran, J.1. The matter arises out of orders passed by the 3rd respondent, the Dy. Commr. of Agrl. I.T. and S.T., Kozhikode, in the purported exercise of his jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Agrl. I.T. Act, 1950. The challenge in this writ petition is directed against Exs, P-10 and P-13.Ex. P. 10 is the order passed by the 1st respondent, the Agrl. ITO, Taliparamba, whereunder the petitioner was assessed to agricultural income-tax to the tune of Rs. 10,807.65 and a surcharge of Rs. 2,759-51. Exhibit P-13 is the order of the 3rd respondent, the Dy. Commr. (Appeals) Agrl. I.T. and S.T., Kozhikode, dated August 17, 1979.2. The grievance of the petitioner against Ex. P-13 order is that it is without considering the relevancy of the reports submitted by the commissioner who visited the property on 27/28 of October, 1977, that the Uy. Commissioner disposed of the revision. A further submission made by the counsel for the petitioner is that though as per the accounts the salary paid to...
Food Inspector Vs. Moosa and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-06-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ168
Kumari P. Janaki Amma, J.1. The appellant is the Food Inspector, Palghat Municipality. A complaint was filed by him against the accused-respondents for offences punishable Under Sections 16(1)(a)(i) and 16(X)(g) read with Section 7(1) and Section 2(la)(a) and (m) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.2. P.W. 1, Food Inspector, visited the shop of the second respondent in Big Bazaar, Palghat, at about 11.15 a. m. on 19-6-1978. He purchased 600 grams of 'Raja Brand' Sambar Powder for the purpose of analysis. This powder was in 12 packets of 50 grams each. After following the formalities prescribed under the prevention of Food Adulteration Act P.W, 1 broke the packets and mixed them in a paper. The powder was then divided into three equal parts and each part was put in a clean and dry bottle. The bottles were packed and sealed as directed in the rules framed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, A mahazar was prepared in the presence of witnesses and attested by them. One of...
A.P. Kochudevassy Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-05-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ker90
Kochu Thommev, J. 1. This appeal is brought by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge at Irinjalakuda, dismissing his suit for recovery of amounts from the defendant which is the State of Kerala. The pla;ntiff is a wholesale ration dealer at Kottappuram in Kodun-gallur taluk in Trichur District. He was appointed as a wholesale dealer under the Kerala Rationing Order, 1966. Exts. B3 and B4 are the agreements executed by him pursuant to his appointment by the District Collector. Under G. O. No. 3/65/Food dated 2-1-1965, the wholesale distributor was entitled to a certain rate of transport charges. The rate was revised and enhanced as per G. O. Rt. 56/70-Food dated 7-2-1970. By virtue of these orders a wholesale distributor is entitled to transport and incidental charges with reference to the zone applicable to him on the basis of distance. The zones have been constituted on the following basis:I Zone -- up to and including 10 miles.II Zone -- up to...
B. Madhava Vs. Dr. Lalitha S.N. Bhat and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-05-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ker134
ORDERK. Bhaskaran, J. 1. The important question of law raised in this writ petition is whether the Appellate Authority exercising power under Section 13 (6) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act, 1965, Act 2 of 1965, for short 'the Act' is competent to remand the matter to the Accommodation Controller for fresh disposal after enquiry and in accordance with law. The petitioner would contend that no such power is conferred on the Appellate Authority, namely, the District Collector.2. Now the facts: The 1st respondent-Dr. Lalitha S. N. Bhat claims to be the lessee of the building situated in the western portion of the property comprised in Rule S. No. 105/4A of Kasba village, Kasargod Taluk. It would appear that the petitioner was originally the tenant in respect of the building in the eastern portion of that property. The entire property at one time belonged to the 2nd respondent (now deceased), whose legal representatives are supplemental respondents 5 to 8. The petitioner ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. P.N. Rajakrishna Menon
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-05-1981
Reported in: [1982]136ITR198(Ker)
Subramonian Poti, Actg. C.J.1. The assessee was the owner of extensive agricultural lands in the possession of cultivating tenants. On January 1, 1970, under the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, the rights of the assessee over these lands held by the cultivating tenants vested in the Kerala Govt. Thereafter, the assessee had only a right to get compensation from the Kerala Govt. for the rights so vested in the Government.2. In the assessment to wealth-tax for the year 1970-71, the WTO accepted the return filed by the assessee treating the right to get compensation as an asset valued at a certain figure and that was included in the net wealth of the assessee. From the assessment so based on such return the assessee filed an appeal contending that he included the right to compensation as an asset by mistake, that it was not an asset at all and further the valuation was excessive. The Tribunal considered in detail the various provisions of the Land Reforms Act, referred to...
Bhageerathi Amma and ors. Vs. Jeevankumar and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-05-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ91
ORDERKu. P. Janaki Amma, J.1. Criminal Appeal No. 344 of 1979 is filed by the complainant in C. C. No. 207 of 1978 of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate's Court, Kanjirappilly, against the acquittal of the accused of offences punishable Under Section 500 of I.P.C. The appeal was presented Under Section 378(4) of Criminal P. C, 1973.2. During the pendency of the appeal the complainant-appellant died. His wife and children filed the present petition, for getting themselves impleaded in the place of the appellant as his legal representatives and for permitting them to prosecute the appeal. The application is opposed.3. The contention put forward is that the appeal has abated consequent on the death of the appellant and that the petitioners have no locus standi to continue the appeal.4. The relevant provision regarding abatement of appeals is contained in Section 394 of Criminal P. C. 1973 which reads:-394. Abatement of appeals:- (1) Every appeal Under Section 377 or Section 378 shall finally a...
Kadungoth Alavi Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-04-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ94
K.K. Narendran, J.1. A youngster, working in a hotel, developed an intimacy with a widow living in a part of a line building with her two school going children. Naturally, the neighbours did not relish this. Scandals spread in no time, Wall-posters appeared connecting the youngster with the widow. The widow gave a written complaint to the Police alleging that her neighbours were going to liquidate her. Those whose names were in the complaint were called to the Police Station and warned. Sometime laer, one evening, the children went to attend a bhajan in the local temple. When they came back, what they could see was the dead body of their mother.2. The accused in S. C. No. 6 of 1980 of the Court of Session. Tellicherry is the appellant. The prosecution case is as follows: The deceased, a widow, was living with her two children in a part of a line building at Chungom within the jurisdiction of the Manantoddy Police Station. The accused was employed in a hotel not tar away from the reside...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›