Kerala Court October 1984 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kerala Financial Corporation Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-31-1984
Reported in: (1985)47CTR(Ker)286; [1985]155ITR246(Ker)
Radhakrishna Menon, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, at the instance of the Revenue, has referred the following questions to this court. In I.T.R. Nos. 126 and 127 of 1979, the question referred is:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Rs. 2,31,591 credited to the interest suspense account for the year ended March 31, 1973, and Rs. 11,65,621 credited to the interest suspense account for the year ended March 31, 1976, should not be brought to tax for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1976-77, respectively ?'and in I.T.R. No. 238 of 1982, the question is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Rs. 17,02,005 credited to the 'interest suspense account' for the year ending March 31, 1977, should not be brought to tax for the assessment year 1977-78 ?'2. These references arise from the assessment proceedings relating to the years of assessment 1973-74, 1976-77 and 1977-78.3. These issues now before us are identical to the issue...
Dr. P.R. Vydianathan Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-30-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Ker188
ORDERP.C. Balakrishna Menon, J.1. Due to a mistake in communication and for no fault of the petitioner, he had been denied admission for the M.D. Course in General Medicine for the year 1982-83. Instead the 4th respondent had been admitted to the course which commenced in Feb. 1984. The petitioner passed the M.B.B.S. Examination of the Calicut University in 1981 with First Class and First Rank. He completed the Course of House Surgeoncy in 1982 and applied for admission to the postgraduate M.D. Course, with first choice in General Medicine and the second choice in Gynaecology. An Entrance Test was held by the Commissioner of Entrance Examinations in Nov., 1983. The petitioner was selected for M.D. in Gynaecology. He was No. 2 in the waiting list for M.D. in General Medicine. He was called for interview at the Kottayam Medical College on 20-2-1984 for admission in that College for M.D. in Gynaecology. Since he was not interested in the subject he did not turn up for the interview.2. Som...
R. Gopalan Nair Vs. State and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-30-1984
Reported in: 1985CriLJ723
ORDERV. Bhaskaran Nambiar, J.1. Can a complainant claim to be examined on Commission? Does he cease to be a complainant when a court takes cognizance of the case and has he to be treated merely as a witness entitled to the protection Under Section 284 of the .Criminal P.C 2. Defamation can be the subject of a civil action. It can also set the criminal law in motion. The petitioner preferred the criminal process and filed a complaint alleging that the accused has committed an offence Under Section 500 read with Section 34, I.P.C. The Court has taken cognizance of the case and issued notice to the accused. The accused has entered appearance.3. But then, the complainant does not want to appear in court. And he has his reasons. He is old, at 85 years of age and infirm to move out of the house. He, therefore, prays that he be examined on commission in his house.4. The accused objects. He submits that law and logic are both on his side. Law, according to him, compels the complainant to face ...
Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes) Vs. S ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-29-1984
Reported in: [1985]58STC333(Ker)
K. Bhaskaran, Ag. C.J.1. In all these revisions, the common question is whether sprayer is an agricultural implement. Inasmuch as it is being used for prevention of pests, it could only be considered as an agricultural implement. The Government Pleader submitted that it was not one of the items included in the circular issued by the Board of Revenue, enumerating agricultural implements. We do not think that, even assuming that such a circular, stated to have been issued by the Board of Revenue, has any statutory backing or force of law, such enumeration of items which could be regarded as agricultural implements could be exhaustive so as not to allow the inclusion of any other items within that term. In Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Bishram Tiwari [1971] 28 STC 485, the Allahabad High Court has taken the view that the intention of the notification in question was to exempt all agricultural implements driven by human or animal power and to tax only those agricultural implements which are...
thekkayil Damodaran and ors. Vs. T. Sankaran and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-26-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Ker134
M.P. Menon, J. 1. A.S. No. 17/78 wan appeal from a decree in a suit. The respondent in the appeal passed away on 12-12-1981 and as his legal representatives were not impleaded in time the appeal abated. The appellant thereafter filed C.M.P. Nos. 6533/82 and 6534/82 for impleading legal representatives and for setting aside abatement, but these were dismissed by a learned single judge. C.M.A. 185/84 is an appeal against that dismissal, and the question is whether an appeal would lie to a Bench of two judges of this Court, from an order of a single judge refusing to set aside the abatement of a First Appeal. According to counsel, such an appeal would lie either under Order 43 Rule 1(k) of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 104 thereof, or under Section 5(ii) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958. 2. Section 104(1) of the Code conceives of appeals against certain classes of orders, and one such order, under Order 43 Rule 1(k) is 'an order under Rule 9 of Order 22 refusing to set a...
Deccan Queen Motor Service Vs. Indian Overseas Bank and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-25-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Ker129
Thommen, J. 1. The 3rd defendant in O.S. No. 87 of 1975 is the appellant. The plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 are the respondents. The suit was decreed against all the three defendants holding them jointly and severally liable for the amounts claimed by the plaintiff. The 3rd defendant is a carrier of goods. Goods consigned by the first defendant to himself were entrusted by him with the 3rd defendant for carriage from Chalisseri (Trichur) to Bombay. 'Goods consignment notes', Exts. A14 to A21, were issued by the 3rd defendant in favour of the first defendant. The term 'the consignee's copies of this set are intended to be assigned or negotiated with a bank' is printed in red on the face of each note. The notes were subsequently negotiated by the first defendant in favour of the plaintiff-bank, as seen from his signature on the back of the notes, and along with them the relative promissory notes and invoices were also handed over to the bank. As the goods consigned to Bombay had not r...
The Kerala Wakf Board, Ernakulam Vs. Valia Maliyekkal Koyanji Koya Tha ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-24-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Ker228
P.C. Balakrishna Menon, J.1. In this second appeal at the instance of the defendant the Kerala Wakf Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') the only question for decision is as to whether the nine items of suit properties constitute a 'Wakf' within the meaning of the Wakf Act, 1954 (Central Act 29 of 1954), hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. The Board after enquiry under Section 27 of the Act came to the conclusion that the suit properties are wakf properties and registered the same as a wakf under Section 28 of the Act as per its order Ext. A8 dated 26-9-1970. The suit is under Sub-section (2) of Section 27 of the Act to set aside Ext. A8 order and to declare that the suit properties are not wakf properties. The trial court held that there is a valid dedication of the properties as a wakf as per the provisions contained in Ext. A4 karar in the family of the plaintiff, and on that finding the suit was dismissed. In appeal the lower appellate court has reversed the decision of...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kerala Financial Corporation
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-24-1984
Reported in: [1985]155ITR228(Ker)
Kothu Thommen, J.1. The following question has been, at the instance of the Revenue, referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Rs. 2,39,010.66 credited to the interest suspense account for the year ending March 31, 1974, and Rs. 2,44,737.13 credited to the interest suspense account for the year ending March 31, 1975, should not be brought to tax for the assessment years 1974-75 and 1975-76, respectively ?'2. The assessee is the Kerala Financial Corporation constituted by the State Government under Section 3 of the State Financial Corporations Act (Central Act No. 63) of 1951. The assessee has been from its inception keepingits accounts according to the mercantile system. In the course of its business, the assessee advances long-term loans extending to 20 years repayable in half yearly instalments. The interest accruing on the loans is generally credited by it to the interest account on the due dates, e...
K.R. Pusphan Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-19-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Ker184
Bhaskaran, Ag. C.J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment in O.P. No. 6346 of 1983 (reported in 1984 Ker LT 257), The writ petition was for quashing Ext. P2 judgment of the2nd respondent, the District Judge, Ernakulam, in C.M.A, No. 36 of 1983 dated 22-7-1983, reversing the order of confiscation of the tempo van involved in the case by the Divisional Forest Officer, Malayattur, the authorised officer under the Forest Act. The appellant was the hirer in respect of the vehicle. The authorised officer by his proceedings Ext. P1, ordered confiscation, as it was, according to him, found to carry contraband article, that is to say, timber which belonged to the Forest. On appeal, the District Judge, after having considered the evidence adduced before him, recorded the following findings : --'(i) The value of the Tempo Van used for the commission of the forest offence is Rs. 80,000/- whereas the value of the timber that was illicitly carried in the van is only Rs. 200/-; (ii) The cas...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Quilon Marine Produce Company
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-18-1984
Reported in: (1985)48CTR(Ker)135; [1986]157ITR448(Ker)
Radhakrishna Menon, J.1. The reference is at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala-I, Ernakulam.2. Pursuant to the directions in the judgment in O. P. No. 83 of 1977-I, the Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following questions to this court :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in confirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner dismissing the application for rectification under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the reassessment initiated under Section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is not valid in law ' 3. The assessment year is 1969-70. While making the original assessment, the Income-tax Officer had disallowed the benefit of Section 35B claimed by the assessee in respect of an amount of Rs. 3,21,965. In appeal, the Appell...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »