Kerala Court July 1985 Judgments
Abdul Karim and anr. Vs. Raheesa Ansari
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-31-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Ker183
ORDERU.L. Bhat, J. 1. These revision petitions are filed by respondents 1 and 2 in O. P. (Succession) 34/83 who are also petitioners in O. P. (Succession) 58/82 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Attingal. Common respondent in the two revision petitions was petitioner in O. P. 34/83 and respondent in O. P. 58/82. Third respondent in O.P. 34/83 is not before Court. In these revision petitions what is challenged is the common judgment of the Dist. Court, Trivandrum in A. S. 377/1983 and A. S. 378/1983 filed by the respondent herein against orders passed in the O. Fs. 2. Claim relates to the estate of Abdu! Karim Ansari who was employed in Dubai, U. A. E. and died there in an accident on 27-2-1982. Revision petitioners are father and maternal grandmother respectively of the deceased. Common respondent is the widow of the deceased. Third respondent in O. P. 34/83 is the only brother of the deceased. 3. Petition in O. P. 34/83 and the counter in O. P. 58/82 give details of the various am...
Tag this Judgment!N. Vittal Praphu Vs. Shrimath Auamtheshwara Temple, Manjeshwar and ors ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-31-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Ker221
ORDERT. Kochu Thommen, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is against an order directing attachment of an amount of Rs. 2,000/- in execution of a decree for money. The petitioner's contention that the application for execution was time-barred was rejected on the ground that he had acknowledged his liability in Ext, Al petition which he had filed within 12 years from the date of the decree in a proceeding in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. The question for consideration is whether for the purpose of execution the period of limitation could be computed from the time when the acknowledgment was made, as provided under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Section 18 provides:'18. Effect of acknowledgment in writing. --(1) Where, before the expiration of the prescribed period for a suit or application in respect of any property or right, an acknowledgment of liability in respect of such property or right has been made in writing signed by the party against whom, such ...
Tag this Judgment!High Court of Kerala Vs. Pritish Nandy
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-30-1985
Reported in: 1985CriLJ1963
K. Bhaskaran, C.J.1. The Illustrated Weekly of India has a pride of place, so we understand, in the journalistic world. It cannot afford to fish for trouble. And 'Troubled Times', an article published in its issue dt. July 7-13-1985, seems to be a 'trouble-maker'. Vilification of a Judge of a High Court naturally transcends the permissible limits of journalistic discretion, and rightly forfeits constitutional protection. Press has freedom; necessarily it is powerful; but this freedom cannot be mortgaged to cheap publicity; nor is it assured by any aggressive posture against the judiciary. Justice is not so blind as to invite its own destruction. So, the publisher and author of the article 'Trouble Times' have thus landed themselves in trouble.2. Courts initiate proceedings suo motu under the Contempt of Courts Act sparingly, as a compelling obligation in very exceptional circumstances of urgency and imperative need. Newspapers - the Illustrated Weekly can be broadly described as belong...
Tag this Judgment!K.M. Salim Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-26-1985
Reported in: 1986CriLJ1197
V. Bhaskaran Nambiar, J.1. Can a sentence imposed on an accused and confirmed in appeal by the High Court be suspended when the accused intends to file an application for special leave before the Supreme Court? This is the short question that arises for determination and thus the scope of Section 389(3) of the Criminal P.C. falls for consideration.2. The petitioner was convicted under Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120-B of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to a term of imprisonment and was also directed to pay fine. He appealed to this Court without success. The conviction and sentence are confirmed. He stated that he was intending to file an application for special leave before the Supreme Court and the sentence may be suspended. Subsequently he has filed the special leave application before the Supreme Court. He, therefore, prays that the sentence be suspended till orders are issued by the Supreme Court and states that, in his present condition, after...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax Vs. Brahmagiri b Estate
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-25-1985
Reported in: [1986]160ITR531(Ker)
K. Bhaskaran, C.J.1. Annexure ' A ' is the copy of the deed of partnership executed on October 8, 1959, which constituted the firm. Clause 5 of the deed (annexure ' A ') provided that the partnership was to continue in the first instance for a period of five years from the date of the deed. Annexure ' B ' is the fresh deed of partnership executed on December 22, 1965. The undisputed fact is that the assessee, M/s. Brahmagiri ' B ' Estate, was recognised to be a registered firm during the assessment year prior to 1965-66. The firm sought renewal of registration under Section 27 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950 (the ' Act '), for the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67 by an application dated June 11, 1965. Annexure ' B ' provided, inter alia :'The deed of partnership expired by efflux of time on October 8, 1964. We, in spite of efflux of time, have been carrying on the business under the same terms and conditions as set out in the deed of partnership referred to above.We...
Tag this Judgment!Kallatra Abbas Haji Vs. Government of India
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-25-1985
Reported in: 1985(6)ECC21; 1985(5)LC1746(Kerala); 1994(69)ELT212(Ker)
V. Bhaskaran Nambiar, J.1. Penalty of a lakh of rupees imposed on the petitioner under the Customs Act pursuant to recovery of foreign fabrics not from the petitioner's house, but from the premises of the other persons has given rise to the writ petition and this appeal.2. In 1974, the Customs Officers recovered 15 gunny bundles of fabrics of foreign origin from the premises belonging to Sri Abdul Khader and Sri CM. Abdulla. Investigation commenced. They denied ownership of the goods or any involvement in the import of these goods and they were also absent when the recovery was effected. However, they seem to have stated before the customs authorities that the contraband seized belonged to petitioner, appellant and they were imported at his instance and with his connivance. The department had taken statements from other persons also and recovered two letters from the house of one Abdulla Kunhi. In these two letters there is no reference to the appellant and they contained only certain ...
Tag this Judgment!Sankaranarayanan and ors. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-24-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Ker82
Sivaraman Nair, J.1. These Original Petitions have their genesis in letters addressed to the Chief Justice by five different citizens. The problem highlighted is seemingly quite an ordinary one -- how far shall organised strength of people seek to strangulate the ordinary civil rights of others? What can be done to mitigate the agony of citizens trapped in populous urban centres, the thoroughfares of which are invaded by massive processions and demonstrations-political, religious or otherwise? Should lawlessness be the taw when large numbers are involved?2. The letters were ordered to be treated as original petitions. Notices were ordered to the Secretary Home (B) Department and the Advocate General, with a copy of the petition in the first of the Original Petitions, requiring the Government to file a statement indicating their stand with respect to the manner in which the Government proposed to tackle the problem resulting from blocking of roads to facilitate processions conducted in ...
Tag this Judgment!Parameswara Ballakuraya Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-24-1985
Reported in: [1987]164ITR536(Ker)
K. Bhaskaran, C.J.1. On receipt of annexures A-1, A-2 and A-3, assessment orders dated October 31, 1977, respectively, for the assessment years 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77, the petitioner filed his objections in which he never raised a question as to whether the notice was bad for not having sent separate notices to him, one in his capacity as the manager of the Hindu undivided family properties and the other as the trustee of the trust properties. He filed the return pursuant to the notice disclosing only the income from the properties held by him in his capacity as the manager of the Hindu undivided family properties, concealing the income derived by him in his capacity as the trustee of the trust properties. The main contention before the Agricultural Income-tax Officer was that he was entitled to exemption under Section 4(3) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950 ('the Act'). The Agricultural Income-tax Officer who inspected the property issued a reassessment notice and complete...
Tag this Judgment!The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Splosna Plovba and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-23-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Ker176
Sukumaran, J. 1. Calicut enjoyed a reputation for its timber trade. Not without reason. It had a port, with limited facilities but unlimited historic connections. In its periphery flourished one of the best timber markets of the world, fed by what was once a boundless contiguity of tropical forests. The appeal atthe instance of the plaintiffs -- the insurer and the shipper -- arises from an export transaction originating from that port. The carriers were from Yugoslavia and the consignees from Japan. Defendant 2 acted as agents in India for defendant 1 Carriers. Defendants 3 and 4 owned, operated and managed the boat engaged for transport of the timber logs from the shore to the ship. 2. The ship 'M.V. Litija' anchored off Calicut at a distance of about three miles from the shore at about 15th April, 1972. The 2nd plaintiff who had entered into a contract for the export of timber, had obtained from the Customs Department on 7-4-1972 the shipping bill authorising the export of 23 logs o...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Oppoottil Agencies
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-23-1985
Reported in: [1986]160ITR120(Ker)
Bhaskaran, C.J.1. The question referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, reads as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law having regard to the provisions of Section 36(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in directing allowance to the extent of Rs. 11,512 of debts which the assessee had claimed had become bad? '2. Till February 1, 1974, there was a firm in which there were three partners and a minor admitted to the benefits of the partnership. All the partners retired on February 1, 1974. The minor along with three other persons reconstituted the firm. The assessee-firm claimed certain deduction by way of bad debts during the year in question. The Income-tax Officer did not allow the deduction holding, firstly, that there was no reconstitution of the firm, and, secondly, that there was no proof of bad debts in existence or steps having been taken to recover the same. The Appellate Assistant Commissi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »