Kerala Court August 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.
State of Kerala Vs. K. Bhaskaran
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-31-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Ker49
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. This is an appeal by the State. The trial court granted a decree for Rs. 11,480/- as damages for breach of contract.2. Plaintiff is a contractor. He entered into a contract with the Government. His tender for the contract work was accepted on 24-6-1972. The contract was for execution of five items of work for flood control in Vamanapuram River. The contract was signed on 4-7-1982. Plaintiff deposited Rs. 6,600/- by way of security. The total amount of the contract was Rs. 1,64,300/- over and above the cost of materials.3. The agreement provided that the Government has to supply the materials. Ext. B1 gives the details of the work to be done. The time fixed for the completion of the work was before 30-9-1972. Plaintiff states that the Government was bound to supply the required quantity of cement to the plaintiff. Admittedly the work was not commenced. It is the case of the plaintiff that he was not able to commence the work since the Government did not supply th...
Travancore Tea Estates Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-31-1984
Reported in: (1985)46CTR(Ker)129; [1985]154ITR745(Ker)
Kochu Thommen, J. 1. The following five questions have been referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench :`'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, 10, 250 paid by the assessee to three of its directors as compensation for loss of office is an allowable deduction for the assessment year 1973-74 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, 589 claimed as loss was only a notional loss for the assessment year under consideration ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the marriage allowance paid by the assessee to its employees was part of the salary and did not constitute perquisite for the assessment year under consideration ? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the car allowance paid by the assessee to its employees was of a perquisite to be taken into consideration for computing the disallowance, if any, to be made under Section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for th...
Union of India Represented by General Manager, Southern Railway, Vs. P ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-31-1984
Reported in: (1985)ILLJ331Ker
M. Fathima Beevi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of K. Bhaskaran, Ag. C.J., allowing O.P. No. 7200/1982 reported in Kunhabdulla v. Union of India 1984-I L.L.J. 118. The respondent herein filed the writ petition against the appellants Union of India and others challenging Ext. P 13 penalty order dated 26th August, 1982 removing the respondent from service.2. The respondent was Assistant Station Master at Ambur in Madras Division of Southern Railway, Madras. He was during the material time elected Secretary (Finance) of the All India Station Masters' Association, Southern Zone. Ext. P 5 letter was published in the letters to the Editor column of the daily 'Indian Express' dated 4th August, 1981 under the caption 'railway accidents'. Disciplinary proceedings were instituted against the respondents under the Railway Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1968 (D & A Rules) on the charge that he committed serious misconduct and acted in a manner unbecoming of a Railway S...
L. Kunhamu Haji Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-30-1984
Reported in: [1985]155ITR516(Ker)
Kochu Thommen, J. 1. In completing the reassessment for the years 1972-73 to 1975-76 and the assessment for the years 1976.77 and 1977-78, the Agrl. ITO included in the computation of the total agricultural income of the assesses, the income derived from an immovable property transferred by the assessee to his wife under a deed of trust dated July 24, 1969 (Document No. 626/1969--annex. C). The assessee's contention that, being a property held under trust, the income arising therefrom was not liable to be so added was rejected. His appeals to the AAC as well as to the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Addl. Bench, Kozhikode, were unsuccessful. The Tribunal held that the trust in question was hit by Clauses (a) and (b) of Sub-section (3) of Section 4 of the Kerala Agrl. I.T. Act, 1950. 2. At the instance of the assessee, the Tribunal has now referred to us the following questions: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law ...
Chillikkodathil Manuel AugustIn Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-30-1984
Reported in: 1984CriLJ1897
ORDERV. Bhaskaran Nambiar, J.1. A novel question, arising in peculiar circumstances, arises for determination in this revision.2. Sri R. Mohan Kumar, Sub-Inspector of Police, Ernakulam Town North Police Station, filed a complaint before the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ernakulam, alleging that the accused Sri. K.G. Nair committed an offence under Section 51(a) of the Kerala Police Act on 8.11.1980 when he, in a drunken state behaved in a disorderly manner in a public place. The Magistrate took the case on file on 13.11.1980 and issued summons to the accused and posted the case to 29.11.1980. The accused appeared on the 28th itself, pleaded not guilty ad was enlarged on bail He was also exempted from personal appearance. The case was posted to 31.12.1980.3. On 29.11.1980, the petitioner herein and another filed an application purporting to be under Sections 257 and 259 of the Code, alleging that they were present to witness the disorderly behaviour of the accused in the p...
E.K. Joseph, E.K. Mathew and Bros. Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-29-1984
Reported in: (1985)45CTR(Ker)140; [1985]155ITR507(Ker)
Kochu Thommen, J.1. Pursuant to the orders of this court in O.P. Nos. 4404, 4406 and 4444 of 1977, the following question has been referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tea bushes cannot be characterised as 'growing crops' ?'2. The assessee is a partner of a firm owning tea estates. He is assessed as an individual in respect of his one-half share. For the assessment years 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1972-73, the assessee filed returns under the W.T. Act, 1957, showing his net wealth after claiming certain exemptions. One of the items claimed as exemption was in respect of growing crops as provided under Section 5(1)(viiia) as it stood at the relevant time. The exemption was claimed for the total value of the buds and leaves plucked from the tea bushes. The WTO, however, accepted the claim only to the extent of 20 per cent. In refusing the claim in respect of the other 80 per cent., the officer followe...
Thulasikumar Anil Kumar and anr. Vs. Raghavan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Ker20
P.C. Balakrishna Menon, J.1. The only question for decision in this second appeal is as to whether a suit for maintenance at the instance of a minor plaintiff represented by a next friend is maintainable against the father who is the natural guardian of the minor under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Guardianship Act).2. The 1st plaintiff was a minor 9 months old on the date of the suit. He was represented by his maternal uncle as the next friend and the suit was for a declaration that the defendant the father of the minor 1st plaintiff is liable to maintain the 1st plaintiff and for future maintenance from the date of suit at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month. The plaint refers to the marriage of Krishnakumari Amma to the defendant in May 1972, the birth of the 1st plaintiff during the subsistence of the marriage, and the divorce between Krishnakumari Amma and the defendant as per a registered document Ext. B1, at a time when the 1st plaintiff...
P.C. Varghese, Adv. Vs. R.T.A. Malappuram and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-24-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Ker44
ORDERU.L. Bhat, J.1. This original petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking to quash Ext. P13 judgment of the second respondent. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam. Petitioner holds a regular permit for the route Puduponnani-Guruvayur in respect of vehicle KRR 1031. Edappal is said to he an important place two kilometres away from the route. Petitioner gave Ext. PI application for variation of the route so as to touch Edappal that is, two single trips on the original route and four single trips on the varied routes under Section 37(8) Motor Vehicles Act (for short 'the Act') and Rule 212, Motor Vehicles Rules, (for short 'the Rules'). He also applied for a temporary permit on the varied routes. First respondent, R. T. A., Malappuram, took up both the applications and directed the application for variation of the route to be notified under Section 57(3) of the Act and rejected the application for temporary permit. The matter was duly notified. It ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. B. Ramanujam Thampi and Others.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-24-1984
Reported in: [1987]167ITR831(Ker)
K. P. RADHAKRISHNA MENON J. - The following question at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala-I, Ernakulam, has been referred to this court for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessees were partners and not co-owners is not the above-finding wrong and unreasonable ?'The year of assessment is 1969-70, the accounting year ending March 31,1969.The facts lie in a narrow compass. On November 10, 1966, the assessees purchased a 'grape garden' at Hyderabad for Rs. 2,95,000. The consideration was paid by drawing movies from the firm, the National Cashew Company, of which the assessees are partners. From the 'grape garden', the assessees, for the year in question, had made a profit of Rs. 4,94,137. The assessees are entitled to equal shares in the said profit. The assessees, however, had not included this receipt in the returns they had furnished for the year in question on the ground th...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sree Narayana Trust
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-23-1984
Reported in: [1985]155ITR389(Ker)
Kochu Thommen, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has, pursuant to the judgment of this court in O. P. No. 1960 of 1977, referred to us the following question : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1971-72 is exempt from tax under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee is the Sree Narayana Trust, Quilon, The trust was constituted by a deed of trust dated August 18, 1952. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1971-72, the assessee received a sumof Rs. 34,590 over and above expenditure. Its claim for exemption underSection 11 of the I.T. Act, 1961, was disallowed by the ITO on the ground that Clauses (c) and (d) of the objects of the trust did not disclose charitable purpose. Overruling that decision, both the AAC and the Tribunal held that neither of the Clauses was inconsistent with a chari...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »