Kerala Court October 1986 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.
Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes) Vs. K ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-17-1986
Reported in: [1987]64STC394(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. This tax revision case by the Revenue challenges the order of the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Ernakulam, by which they allowed an appeal filed by the respondent and held that levy of sales tax on the sales turnover of confiscated foreign textiles and cigarettes under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 ('the Act' in short) was not justified. The respondent is a co-operative society sponsored by the Kerala Government. The main activity of the society is purchase of consumer goods from production centres and distribution of the same to district and primary level co-operative societies for distribution. The respondent-society also sells goods through their own retail shops.2. The respondent deals in all types of goods such as textiles, cigarettes and other consumer items. Inter alia, they sell goods which are confiscated by the Customs Department of the Government of India, goods which are brought or imported into India unauthorised...
Narayanan and ors. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-16-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ741
ORDERK.T. Thomas, J.1. The petitioners are said to be 'Sarvodaya' workers. According to them, their leader is Sri M. P. Manmadan, renowned Gandhian. The petitioners are now accused in a case registered as Crime No. 235/86 of the Museum Police Station, Trivandrum. The said crime has been registered on the allegation that the petitioners prevented one Prasad from entering a liquor shop at Nandavanam in Trivandrum. The first information statement was furnished by the said Prasad and the police registered the crime for offences Under Sections 143 and 341 of the Penal Code (for short the Code) read with Section 149 of the Code. The incident happened on 8-9-1986 as part of a campaign against the evils of consumption of alcohol. This petition Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to quash the said crime and the subsequent proceedings.2. According to the petitioners, no physical obstruction had been caused by them to any one entering the liquor shop and instead, what they did ...
Abdul Sathar Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-15-1986
Reported in: [1987]64STC441(Ker)
M. Fathima Beevi, J.1. The petitioner has been assessed to sales tax for the assessment year 1981-82, both under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act. Exhibits P18 and P19 are the assessment orders. The petitioner seeks to have exhibits P18 and P19 quashed on various grounds contending, inter alia, that the assessment proceedings violate the petitioner's fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The main ground taken up is that there had been originally an assessment on the proprietor of the concern 'Aries Spices' and the present assessment has been made on the premises that the business is a joint venture by three persons including the petitioner and such assessment amounts to double taxation and is without the authority of law. It has not been specifically alleged how the proceedings infringe the fundamental rights of the petitioner.2. Shri Karunakaran Nambiar, Special Government Pleader (Taxes), has taken notice on behalf of the...
thekkethodika Mammadunni Vs. Adangalpuravan Alavikutty
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-1986
Reported in: 1988CriLJ53
ORDERK.T. Thomas, J.1. Juma Masjid Mosque and Hidayathul Madrassa situated in Perakkamanna village in Eranadu Taluk, unfortunately, became the subject-matters in a dispute between two factions of the Muslim community of the said village. One faction is called the 'Sunnis' and the other is called the 'Mujahids'. When the dispute reached an explosive situation the police feared imminent and severe breach of the peace. Hence the local police intervened and initiated prosecution proceedings against the members of the rival factions. Later they filed a report for taking preventive steps against some persons and on the basis of the said report, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Perintalmanna commenced proceedings under Section 145(1) Criminal P.C. (for short 'the Code'). He arrayed some of the members of the rival factions into two groups, one group in the A Party, and the other in the B Party and directed them as per his preliminary order to attend his Court on a date specified therein to file...
Mavila Chathoth Vasudevan Nambiar Vs. Mavila Chathoth Krishnan Nambiar ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-10-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Ker88
Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. Appellant herein filed the suit for partition and separate possession of his l/6th share in the plaint schedule properties. These properties admittedly belonged to one Kunkan Adiyodi, who died on March 2, 1977 at the age of about 92. Kunkan Adiyodi had four sons, namely the plaintiff, defendants 1 and 2 and one Padmanabhan Nambiar who was dead prior to the filing of the suit, and whose heirs at law are defendants 10 to 16. Kunkan Adiyodi had also two daughters, namely the 3rd defendant and one Madhavi Amma who was also dead before the filing of the suit and whose heirs are defendants 4 to 9. Plaintiff claimed l/6th share in the properties which belonged to Kunkan Adiyodi as if he died intestate.2. The 1st defendant, the 2nd defendant, the 3rd defendant and defendants 4 to 9 filed separate written statements contending that the plaint schedule properties were not partible as claimed by the plaintiff, inasmuch as Kunkan Adiyodi had executed a will on January 6, 1971...
Vikraman Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-10-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1703
U.L. Bhat, J.1. On the night of 27-2-1981 the now deceased Unni sustained stab injury at the hands of the appellant and died subsequently on the way to hospital. The appellant was tried on a charge under Section 302, I.P.C. On the basis of the evidence adduced and overruling the plea of right to private defence set up by the appellant, Sessions Court convicted and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. This is now challenged in the appeal.2. P.Ws. 3, 1 and 2 are sisters of the appellant. Till about a year prior to the occurrence, appellant was living in the house in Adimali, left by his father. He sold the same and then started residing with his sisters in the house hi which the occurrence subsequently took place. Now deceased Unni was the younger brother of appellant's mother. He also was living in this house. There is no dispute that Unrii and P.W. 1 were living as man and wife. It appears, Unni and P.W. 1 wanted to construct a house for themselves in the two acre plot in wh...
George Thomas Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-10-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1311
ORDERK. T. Thomas, J.1. The petitioner was practising dentistry at Erattupetta. He has no qualification or registration to practise dentistry. Section 49 of the Dentists Act, 1948 (Central Act XVI of 1948) (for short the Act) prohibits a person from practising dentistry unless that person is a registered dentist, or a registered dental hygenist or a registered dental mechanic. On 11-6-1979, PW. 2, the Vice President of the Kerala Dental Council, inspected the place where the petitioner was practising dentistry in a clinic styled as 'J. J. Dental Hospital', by using the degree of B.D.S. along with his name. Prosecution steps were initiated against him at the instance of the Registrar of the Kerala Dental Council. He was found guilty of the offence under Section 49 of the Act. He was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. The Sessions Court confirmed the conviction and sentence.2. Two points have been urged in this revision. The first is that the trial court took cognizance ...
Trichur Urban Co-op Bank Ltd. Vs. District Labour Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-09-1986
Reported in: (1987)IILLJ38Ker
ORDERThomas, J.1. The question mooted in this revision is whether the offence under Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the Act) is a 'continuing offence' as envisaged in Section 472 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code). If it is a continuing offence, then the bar under Section 468 of the Code will not operate in this case. If it is not a continuing offence, a few other questions may also arise for consideration.2. The District Labour Officer, Trichur filed a criminal complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Trichur against the Trichur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. (for short the Bank) and some of its office bearers as the accused alleging that those accused have contravened Section 17A of the Act by not implementing the terms of an award passed by the Labour Court, Ernakularm. The said award was published in the Kerala Gazette on 2nd March 1982 as provided in Section 17A of the Act. As per the award, the Bank was directed to reins...
Collector of Customs and Central Excise Vs. Calicut Refrigeration Comp ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-1986
Reported in: 1986(10)ECC383; 1986LC547(Kerala); 1987(32)ELT367(Ker)
Bhaskaran Nambiar, J.1. Whether 'Ice Cream Combination Cooler', a composite unit assembled by the writ petitioner in the customer's premises. 'The Indian Coffee House' at Calicut attracts Excise duty under Tariff Item 29A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, is the question that arises for consideration in this writ appeal.2. The writ petitioner installed, an Ice Cream, Combination Cooler in the premises of the Indian Coffee House at Calicut in 1976, according to the requirements and specifications of the coffee house. The component parts of the unit, including the condenser, thermostat valve, electric motor, stainless steel churner, cooling cans, etc. assessed to Excise duty and sales tax separately, were purchased from outside. They were transported to the coffee house, built with masonry and fixed, after putting up iron tanks, in two separate but adjacent rooms and connected together by copper tubings. It was thus a composite unit requiring both skill and labour, originality and ima...
Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes) Vs. P ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-1986
Reported in: [1990]78STC49(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. The Revenue is the revision-petitioner in both these tax revision cases. The same assessee is the respondent in both the cases. The respondent-assessee is manufacturing machineries. They are vertical and horizontal handsaws and wood lathes. For the assessment years, 1980-81 and 1981-82, the sales turnover relating to the said goods was assessed at 8 per cent as falling under entry 141 of the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. Entry 141 of the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, is as follows :Sl. No.Description of goodspoint of levyRate of tax141Machinery and transport equipments (other than those specificallymentioned in the schedule)At the point of first sale in the State by a dealer who isliable to tax under section 582. The objections raised by the assessee to the effect that the goods cannot be taxed under entry 141 aforesaid was negatived by the assessing authority as also by the first appellate authority. The Tribunal...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »