Kerala Court December 1987 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.
Sarah Cherian Trust Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-18-1987
Reported in: [1988]173ITR656(Ker)
M. Fathima Beevi, J. 1. The petitioner is a trust assessed under the Income-tax Act, 1961. For the assessment year 1974-75, the original assessment was completed under Section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, a notice dated July 26, 1978, was issued under Section 148, to reassess the income for the year. The income is alleged to have escaped assessment because of the claim for exemption under Section 11, which has been allowed. By exhibit P-1 assessment order dated December 19, 1978, the Income-tax Officer held that income received by the trust cannot be stated to be received specifically on behalf of or for the benefit of any one person in terms of the provisions made in Section 164(1) of the Act. The claim for deduction under Section 80C was also found not eligible. The total income was fixed as 65%.2. Aggrieved by the order of assessment, the petitioner preferred a revision before the Commissioner. It was contended that the reopening was bad in law because no order of assessment was...
T. Parameswaran Vs. the District Collector, Ernakulam and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Ker175
John Mathew, J. 1. This is an appeal filed under Section 10 of the Kerala Dramatic Performances Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act. The District Collector, Ernakulam who is the first respondent herein, passed an order dt. 17-3-1987 under Section 4(1) of the Act, copy of which is produced as Annexure III to the Memorandum of Appeal, prohibiting the staging of the drama 'Kristuvinte Aaram Thirumurivu' for a period of three months in any part of the Ernakulam District. This appeal is filed by the Convenor of Aasayaviskara Samrakshana Samithy, Ernakulam District which is stated to be a society for protecting the freedom of expression and speech of the public and for creating consciousness among the public to protect the said rights. Originally, the District Collector, Ernakulam and Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ernakulam alone were the respondents in the appeal. Subsequently, some organisations and individuals filed petitions for impleading them as additional respondents. On...
C.J. Zacharia Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1987
Reported in: (1988)67CTR(Ker)279; [1988]173ITR632(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. The petitioner in O.P. No. 3198 of 1979 is the appellant in this writ appeal. The appeal is from the judgment of a learned single judge dismissing the original petition, negativing the plea of the appellant that the imposition of interest under Section 139(8) of the Income-tax Act without notice to the appellant, is illegal.2. We are concerned with the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75. The appellant, an assesses to income-tax, did not file returns for the above two years, though he was served with notices under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act. The assessments were made under Section 144 of the Act. Interest under Section 139(8) of the Act was levied for both the years as per exhibits P-1 and P-2 assessment orders. A challenge against the levy of interest under Section 139(8)(a) of the Act made before the Commissioner of Income-tax was not successful. The Commissioner of Income-tax dismissed the revisions filed by the assessee as per exhibit P-6 order dated...
Grahari Vs. State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1351
ORDERChettur Sankaran Nair, J.1. Petitioner, a convict prisoner undergoing imprisonment jumped jail, was rearrested, tried and convicted of the offence under Section 225 B. A sentence of six months was imposed. Appeal was unsuccessful and hence the revision petition.2. Sentence of imprisonment petitioner is undergoing would terminate only on 7-9-1988.3. Prayer in this petition is to make the sentence now imposed concurrent with the sentence which petitioner is undergoing. If it is so made, petitioner will not have to suffer consequences of the conviction and petitioner may feel justified in making similar attempts. Even if he does not succeed, nothing will be lost, if sentences are to be concurrent.4. Courts have power to direct sentences to run concurrently. Such power must also be exercised in proper cases. But it must not be so exercised to make sentences ineffective or crime inconsequential. Sometimes habitual offenders with several convictions make a limited prayer for concurrent ...
Karthiyani Vs. M.A.C.T. Kottayam
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1987
Reported in: 1(1989)ACC145
Thomas, J.1. Petitioner is a widow. Her husband died in a motor accident on 14-9-1984. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (for short MACT) Kottayam passed an award for Rs. 54,600/- in favour of the legal heirs of petitioner's husband. The share due to the petitioner has been worked out at Rs. 17,271 39. Petitioner applied for cheque before the M A.C.T. But the application was rejected by the Tribunal as per Ext. P-3 order. This original petition is in challenge of the said order. It is prayed that Ext. P-3 may be quashed and the M.A.C.T. may be directed to issue cheque pursuant to the application filed by the petitioner.2. The impugned order reads thus:The amount applied for is the amount due to the widow. In the light of the rulings reported in 1983 ACJ 57 and (1) KLT 45 (DB) the amount due to the widow is only to be deposited. Hence this application is dismissed.3. The decision of the Division Bench referred to in Ext. P-3 is published in the short notes portion of the Kerala Law T...
Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Board of Rev ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-14-1987
Reported in: [1988]69STC38(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. The appellant is an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. For the year 1980-81, the taxable turnover of local sales of sulphur was fixed at Rs. 2,08,94,168 and taxed at the general rate of 4 per cent by the assessing authority. The Board of Revenue initiated suo motu proceedings under Section 37 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and took the view that the sales turnover of sulphur for the period from 16th September, 1980 to 31st March, 1981, amounting to Rs. 75,09,162.30 was liable to tax at the rate of 8 per cent as against 4 per cent levied. Notice was issued to the assessee to show cause why the order of assessment dated 10th August, 1983, passed by the assessing authority, levying tax at the rate of 4 per cent should not be modified. After hearing the assessee, the Board of Revenue held that sulphur is a 'chemical' and will come within entry No. 71 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, and for the period from 16th September, 1980 to 31st March, 19...
Ananthakrishnan Vs. Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-10-1987
Reported in: (1988)IILLJ526Ker
Sreedharan, J.1. Petitioner was working as Assistant Branch Manager at the Trichur Branch of the first respondent Company. Disciplanary action was taken against him. He was served with memo of charges and statement of the imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour. An enquiry was held into the charges as provided by Rule 25 of the General Insurance (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1975, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The Enquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty of the charges. On the basis of the enquiry report, the Assistant General Manager by Ext. P 5 order dated 13th January 1979 imposed a major penalty of removal from the service. The said order further provided for recovery of the financial loss sustained by the Company from out of the amounts payable to the petitioner by way of Gratuity and other amounts. The order Ext. P 5 was taken up in appeal before the General Manager as provided by Rulc31 of the Rules. By Ext. P 7 dated 6th August 1979, the Appellate Auth...
Parthas Trust Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-09-1987
Reported in: (1988)68CTR(Ker)1; [1988]173ITR615(Ker)
T. Kochu Thommen, J.1. The following two questions have been, at the instance of the assessee, referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the surplus realised on the sale of goodwill of the Changanacherry business of the assessee acquired by the assessee at a cost is to be assessed as capital gains under Section 45 in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. B. C. Srinivasa Setty : [1981]128ITR294(SC) 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee is not entitled to depreciation on the immovable property which has not been transferred to the assessee by the previous owner by a registered deed of conveyance '2. We answer question No. 2, in the light of the decision of the Full Bench of this court in Parthas Trust v. CIT : [1988]169ITR334(Ker) , in the affirmative, that i...
P.M. Pareed Vs. C. Aysha
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-08-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ806
ORDERChettur Sankaran Nair, J.1. Respondent claimed maintenance for herself and for infant daughter. Marriage and paternity were admitted. But, the claim was resisted on other grounds. Trial Magistrate awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 100/- per month for the child and rejected the claim of respondent wife. In revision, Sessions Judge awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 150/- per month to respondent, besides affirming the order in favour of the child.2. Learned Counsel for petitioner submitted that respondent was divorced, and that D6 should have been relied on to find divorce. It is his further contention that when the respondent wife was examined in Court on 30-8-1986, she was informed that she had been divorced. Relying on the decision in Mohammed Haneefa v. Pathummal Beevi 1972 Ker LT 512, counsel submitted that divorce could be effected by addressing the 'Talak' to a person other than wife, and such would do service for divorce. Suggestion put by counsel for the husband to...
V.T. Thomas and ors. Vs. Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-1987
Reported in: AIR1989Ker49
ORDERSukumaran, J. 1. A very important issue is involved in this interim petition in an interlocutory matter.2. More arguments, than would have been necessary for the disposal of the appeal itself, had been advanced on either side. Having regard to the frame of the petition and the character of the order, to be passed, conclusions have to be as brief as possible. It would be superfluous to reiterate that the conclusions indicated are provisional in character. (Indication of such provisional views are not impermissible even in the course of arguments -- is an opinion entertained by many jurists. One of the eminent men in that line is Lord McCluskey and his views are stated in the Reith Lectures, now published under the title 'Law, Justice and Democracy'.)3. A definite conclusion is therefore essential, in relation to a final disposal of a matter, albeit interlocutory in character, despite the provisional nature of the conclusion. Supportive reasons, of necessity, must be there as essent...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »