Kerala Court November 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.
C.D. Govinda Rao Vs. Government of India
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-13-1986
Reported in: 1987(13)ECC167; 1987(10)LC601(Kerala); 1987(27)ELT209(Ker)
V.S. Mallimath, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the learned single Judge in O.P. No. 171 of 1979. The relevant facts necessary for the disposal of this case may briefly be stated as follows. The appellant was a dealer in gold, holding licence issued by the Gold Control Lincensing Authority. He was doing the business as a licensed gold dealer. On the 9th of July, 1974, the Superintendent of Central Excise, Integrated Divisional Office, Ernakulam and party searched the premises of the appellant and seized gold ornaments weighing 2029.500 grams under a mahazar prepared on the occasion. That was done on the allegation that the appellant had violated the provisions of Section 55 of the Gold Control Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the appellant not having entered the possession of the said gold ornaments in the accounts, which were required to be maintained in accordance with the said statutory provision. The appellant was duly served with notice under Sect...
V. Rughmini Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-13-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ200
ORDERK.T. Thomas, J.1. The petitioner, a lady Civil Surgeon of the General Hospital, Cochin, is arraigned as an accused in an FIR registered by the city police commissioner, Cochin, alleging commission of the offence Under Section 304A of the I.P.C. She was arrested and released on bail on 1-11-1985. This petition filed Under Section 482 of the Criminal P.C. (for short 'the Code') is to quash the said FIR and all subsequent proceedings thereto. A learned single Judge who heard the Cri. M. C. was of the opinion that the case involves 'substantial questions for which direct precedents are lacking.' and referred the case to a Division Bench and the Division Bench, in turn, referred the case to a Full Bench.2. The FIR is mainly based on a petition filed by one Madan Gopal. His wife Mala aged 28 died at the Lakshmi Nursing Home on 21-9-1983. The substance of the petition filed by Madan Gopal is this : When his wife Mala became pregnant, he took her to the petitioner on 24-2-1983 for consult...
P.G. Hari, Minor by His Next Friend Vs. Director General, Indian Counc ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-13-1986
Reported in: I(1987)ACC228
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. These are two appeals against the judgment and the decree in O.S. No. 33 of 1976 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kasaragad. A.S. No. 14 of 1980 is by the plaintiff and A.S. No. 18 of 1980 is by the defendants. We shall refer to the parties in accordance with their array in the suit.2. The plaintiff was a minor aged 5 years at the time of the suit. He filed the suit for realisation of a sum of Rs. 60,000/- by way of damages and expenses incurred by him on account of a bus accident. The bus KLC 6218 stood registered in the name of the second defendant and its ownership vested in the first defendant. The 3rd defendant was the driver of the bus and the 4th defendant was the Insurance Company with whom the bus had been insured for third party risk and covering the vehicle against all accidents. The accident took place on 16-7-1974. According to the plaintiff, the 3rd defendant was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. The plaintiff who was stan...
State of Kerala Vs. Official Liquidator, Palai Central Bank (In Liquid ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-11-1986
Reported in: [1987]62CompCas742(Ker); [1987]168ITR700(Ker)
Kochu Thommen, J.1. This appeal is brought by the State from the order of the learned judge dismissing the appellant's application filed under section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, read with rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959. The learned judge declared that the orders of assessment under the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, in respect of which the amounts due were sought to be recovered, were null and void and of no effect. The learned judge held that those orders were made otherwise than in compliance with the rules of natural justice, in so far as the respondent-official liquidator, Palai Central Bank, had not been heard.2. The orders of assessment in question are in respect of the assessment years 1975-76, 1976-77 and 1977-78. The property belonged to the late Joseph Augustine, whose legal representative is John Mathew. As a director of the company at the relevant time, proceedings were initiated against Augustine and others under the Companies Act for misfeasance. As ...
K.K. Marakkar Vs. Kerala Public Service Commission
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-11-1986
Reported in: (1987)IILLJ101Ker
Malimath, C.J.1. This appeal is against the judgment of the learned single Judge in O.P. No. 3815 of 1981. The Public Service Commission invited applications from qualified candidates in the Public Works Department for selection to the post of Assistant Engineers (Civil). It is clear from the notification Ext. P2 that 1st and IInd grade Overseers/Draftsmen who had not less than two years service in the Public Works Department were eligible to apply for the post. The appellant was not called for the interview, though, according to him, he is duly qualified. He therefore approached this Court in O.P. No. 3815 of 1981 and obtained an interim order directing the Public Service Commission to interview him. Accordingly he has been interviewed and in the list of 8 selected candidates he has been assigned the 7th rank provisionally. It is not disputed that if the appellant was eligible he would be entitled to secure the appointment, as there were more than 8 vacancies at the relevant point of ...
Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes) Vs. S ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-10-1986
Reported in: [1987]66STC49(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. This tax revision case at the instance of the Revenue concerns the assessment year 1976-77. The assessee-respondent had purchased fresh frog legs and after removing the skin, washing and removing dirt, etc. and freezing it for the purpose of avoiding decomposition and decay, the frog legs were exported. The assessee claimed that on the facts of the case they were entitled to the benefits under Section 6(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act as amended and that the purchases of the frog legs were exempted from levy of tax. The contention of the Revenue was that what were purchased were fresh frog legs, which were not exported as such and hence Section 5(3) had no application. The order of assessment denying the benefits of Section 5(3) was set aside in appeal by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the frog legs purchased did not lose their character as frog legs by virtue of the operations carried on before export. The Appellate Tribunal has affirmed this...
D. Jayakumari Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-10-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Ker181
ORDERVarghese Kalliath, J.1. The chief question that has to be decided in this Original Petition concerns the interpretation of a clause in the Prospectus issued by the Government of Kerala, Department of Technical Education for admissions to Engineering Colleges. Clause 9 of the Prospectus prescribes a method of selection of candidates. It provides that selection of candidates to all the seats for admission to Engineering Course in Government Institutions and 85% of the seats in Private Institutions will be made, based on an Entrance Examination in Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry. Further, it is provided that in the case of Private Institutions 15% of the seats will be filled up by the Management concerned from among the eligible applicants who have applied in time to the Commissioner for Entrance Examination in response to the notification calling for applications.2. Sub-clause (ii) of Clause 9 makes provision for reservation for certain categories. It reads thus :--'The following...
Kerala Gazetted Officers Front and ors. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-07-1986
Reported in: (1987)IILLJ455Ker
Sivaraman Nair, J.1. Petitioner's in these Original Petitions are employees of the State Government or their representative associations. Such Government servants are those who are to retire from service on superannuation on the attainment of 55 years of age as provided in Rule 60(a) Part I, Kerala Service Rules. They seek revision of their age of retirement from 55 years to 58 or 60 years. Incidentally they also pray that the respondent State may be directed to continue them in service even after they attain the age of superannuation in accordance with Rule 60(a), Part I, Kerala Service Rules.2. Some of the principal grounds urged by petitioners are that the age of superannuation has been refixed as 60 for teachers and academics in all the Universities and that the benefit of such revised age of retirement has been extended to Coaches, personnel in the Physical Education Department, Instructors etc. The age of retirement of members of the Kerala Public Service Commission is 62 years, ...
Mohanraj Vs. Regional Providend Fund Commissioner
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-06-1986
Reported in: (1987)IILLJ177Ker
Fathima Beevi, J.1. Petitioner has challenged Exts. P2 and P5 proceedings of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and prays for appropriate directions setting aside the same.2. The petitioner who has started a small scale unit to manufacture household utensils by letter dated 30th March 1983, evidenced by Ext. P1 intimated the 2nd respondent to introduce the Provident Fund scheme in the unit with retrospective effect from January 1983. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, by Ext. P2 dated 15th June 1983, replied that the scheme is applicable to the petitioner's establishment from 1980 onwards. By Ext. P3 letter dated 28th June 1983, the petitioner pointed out that he is liable to pay provident fund contribution only with effect from 1983. After remitting the contribution and dues for the year 1983 further intimation was given as evidenced by Ext. P4 dated 13th July 1983. The 1st respondent, by Ext. P5 proceedings dated 18th September 1985, informed that the petitioner is liabl...
M.K. Kunhimohammed Vs. P.A. Ahmedkutty and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-04-1986
Reported in: I(1987)ACC262
Kochu Thommen 1. Saheeda was a constable of the Armed Reserve Police, She was one of the passengers in a bus KLD 9327 which met with an accident on July 24, 1978, resulting in Saheeda's death. Three of her children were travelling with her in that bus. One of them was an infant of 70 days. She was carrying it in her arms. All the three children escaped unhurt. So did her husband, PW-2, who was the checking inspector of the bus and who happened to be in the bus at the time of the accident. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving of the first respondent, in respect of which the appellant (second respondent) as the owner of the bus and employer of the driver was held vicariously liable. The respondent-insurer was also held liable in terms of the policy. The Tribunal determined the compensation payable by the owner in the sum of Rs. 56,800. The Tribunal further held that the liability of the insurer to indemnify the owner was limited to Rs...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »