Kerala Court December 1988 Judgments
Cominco Binani Zinc Ltd. Vs. Pappachan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-28-1988
Reported in: (1989)ILLJ452Ker
Sreedharan, J.1. Petitioner challenges Ext. P3 award passed by the third respondent, Industrial Tribunal, Alleppey in I.D. No. 23 of 1982. The petitioner-company is having more than 250 workers on its rolls. As per Section 46 of the Factories Act and the Rules framed thereunder the Company has to provide and maintain a canteen for its employees. The company has provided all facilities for running a canteen. The right to conduct the canteen was being given on contract to others from time to time. First respondent was a contractor engaged for the said purpose and he was running the canteen upto 18th April 1978. From 19th April 1978 to 28th June 1978 the workers of the Company themselves were running the canteen. From 29th June 1978 a new contractor took up the responsibility of running the same. At no point of time had the company run the canteen by itself. The contractors who took up the responsibility of running the canteen were engaging their own workmen and they were being paid by th...
Tag this Judgment!Rajani Vs. Subramonian
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-22-1988
Reported in: AIR1990Ker1; I(1990)DMC561
Fathima Beevi, J.1. Subramonian, an Engineering Graduate, married on 25-8-1974 Rajani, then a post-graduate student. The couple lived together until 1982 and three children are born to them. In the meantime, Rajani continued her studies and completed the LL.B. Course and is now gainfully employed. She separated from her husband in 1982 and started living along with the three children in her parental home.2. Rajani filed a petition under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of the marriage on the ground of cruelty. The petition was numbered as O.P. 77 of 1984before the Sub Court, Eranakulam. The husband denied the allegations and moved the court for restitution of conjugal rights. The two petitions were jointly tried. The parties were examined and documents proved.3. The learned Subordinate Judge by the common order dated 12-12-1984 disposed of the petitions. The learned Judge found that the cruelty alleged has not been established. The wife was however granted a d...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Vasudevan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-21-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Ker140; [1989]65CompCas680(Ker); (1989)IILLJ220Ker
Fathima Beevi, J.1. These appeals under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 have been referred to the larger Bench in view of the conflicting views expressed in Bench decisions of this Court on the scope of Section 14 of the Act.2. The question raised is whether in adjudicating the claim of a dependant of a workman who died as a result of a motor accident, the workmen's Compensation Commissioner can direct the insurer to pay the amount awarded as comperisation. The appellants contend that the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner has no jurisdiction or authority to pass an award against the Insurance Company and the only occasion a liability can be fixed on the insurer by the Commissioner is when the conditions contemplated by Section 14 of the Act exist.3. In New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Parameswari Amma, ILR(1976) 1 Ker237, this Court, in considering the legality of the direction by the Commissioner that the insured is entitled to be indemnified by the insurer to ...
Tag this Judgment!Lord Krishna Bank Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-21-1988
Reported in: (1989)76CTR(Ker)62; [1989]176ITR508(Ker)
Fathima Beevi, J. 1. The petitioner is an income-tax assessee. This petition raises the question as to the liability of the Central Government to pay interest to assessees under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the difference between the aggregate of the income-tax deducted at source under the provisions of Sections 193, 194 and 194A of the Act and paid to the credit of the Central Government under Section 200 of the said Act and the tax determined on regular assessment and the constitutional validity of the provisions of Sections 214, 215 and 217 of the Act. 2. The assessment years concerned in the petition are 1975-76 to 1979-80, both inclusive. The petitioner, a company engaged in the business of banking, had investments in the shape of securities and shares. Income-tax had been deducted at source on the interest due to the petitioner on securities held by it and dividends payable to the petitioner on shares and paid to the Central Government under the provisions of th...
Tag this Judgment!C.S. Kesavan Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-13-1988
Reported in: [1989]176ITR375(Ker); (1989)ILLJ404Ker; [1989]72STC432(Ker)
1. The petitioner, while working as Member (Departmental), Kerala Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Ernakulam, retired from service on October 31, 1983, on superannuation. On retirement, the pensionary benefits and gratuity that were legitimately due to him were not paid without undue delay. A provisional pension at the rate of Rs. 588 per month was sanctioned as per order dated May 10, 1984. Full pension at the rate of. Rs. 807 was sanctioned as per exhibit P-7 order dated July 19, 1984. After deducting a sum of Rs. 798.53 from out of the Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity, the balance amounting to Rs. 28,076.47 was also sanctioned to the petitioner by exhibit P-7. The petitioner now claims interest at 12% per annum on the various amounts on account of the delayed payment in the following terms :(a) on full pension of Rs. 807 plus DAC Rs. 388 per month from November 1, 1983 to July 3, 1984 ; (b) on the differential value of pension at Rs. 269 per ...
Tag this Judgment!P.D. Varghese and E.J. Davis Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-12-1988
Reported in: (1989)78CTR(Ker)158; [1989]180ITR187(Ker)
K. Sukumaran, J.1. The petitioner complains about the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, exhibit P-2, in a matter in which he had invoked Section 273A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. That section has a specific statutory content, emphasising that it is a matter of discretion for the Commissioner of Income-tax. Just like any other discretion, this one, statutorily stated to be such a discretion, has to be judicially exercised. Very many aspects have to be naturally looked into while the function is discharged. 2. The question for this court to consider is whether there could be any legitimate complaint about a perverse exercise of discretion at the hands of the Commissioner. If two views are possible and one view has been taken by the Commissioner, this court will not be justified in interfering with the exercise of that power. Even if another view could have been taken by thiscourt, that would hardly be a good ground for interfering with the discretion already exercised ; the...
Tag this Judgment!Canara Bank Vs. Gokuldas Shenoy and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-09-1988
Reported in: [1991]72CompCas298(Ker)
Shamsuddin, J.1. The plaintiff in O. S. No. 10 of 1978 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Kasaragod is the appellant.2. The suit was filed for recovery of money. It is necessary to state briefly the facts which are relevant for determination of the question raised in the appeal.3. The first defendant who is the proprietor of a firm by name 'Paxwell Printers' was given various financial facilities by the plaintiff-bank under various transactions and as on the date of the plaint, a total of Rs. 5,39,220.93 was due from the first defendant. One such facility was open cash credit facility for a sum of Rs. 50,000 on the strength of a deed of hypothecation and a promissory note. The stock-in-trade and the raw materials which belonged to the first defendant were hypothecated to the plaintiff bank. The first defendant was also given a key shut cash credit facility for a sum of three lakhs of rupees on the pledge of raw materials belonging to him as security. Subsequently, the...
Tag this Judgment!Rev. Fr. Abraham Vs. V.M. Thomas and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-09-1988
Reported in: 1989CriLJ705
ORDERS. Padmanabhan, J.1. A Magistrate, taking cognizance of an offence upon receiving a complaint of facts, which constitute such an offence, from a private individual under Section 190(1)(a) of Cr. P.C., is bound to comply with the provisions of Section 200 by examining the complainant and the witnesses present, if any. If after considering those statements he is satisfied that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding, he can dismiss the complaint under Section 203. On the other hand, if his satisfaction is that there is sufficient ground for proceeding, he can issue process under Section 204, Except in complaints involving offences exclusively triable by the Court of Session, a preliminary enquiry under Section 202 is only optional according to the discretion of the Magistrate. He need have such an enquiry only if even after complying with Section 200 some doubt lingers in his mind as to whether he has to proceed or not.2. To bring an offender to justice is the right of every on...
Tag this Judgment!Gopalakrishnan Nair Vs. thembatty Ramani
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-08-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Ker331
Sivaraman Nair, J.1. Theappellant and respondent were husband and wife. The husband filed O.P. No. 22 of 1981 Under Section 12(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, claiming that the marriage was null and void since he was an epileptic and impotant. It was his case that the marriage was not consummated for those reasons. That application was allowed by judgment dated 18-10-1982. The respondent filed an application. LA. No. 26 of 1983, before the lower Court under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, claiming maintenance at the rate ofRs. 300/- per mensem till she remarried. The appellant resisted the application. He contended that the application under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act was not maintainable in a case where the marriage itself was declared null and void. He also contended that the respondent, his former wife, was not entitled to any maintenance at all, since the effect of the decree of nullity of marriage was that there never existed any jural relationship between them and t...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of Travancore Vs. Punnose Ninan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-08-1988
Reported in: [1991]72CompCas360(Ker)
K.T. Thomas, J. 1. A debtor wished to have settlement of his debts by resorting to the ameliorative provisions contained in Section 15 of the Kerala Agriculturists Debt Relief Act, 1970 (Act 11 of 1970) (for short 'the Act'). He filed an application for that purpose in which he had shown two items of debts due to the State Bank of Travancore (for short 'the bank') and two other debts (involving much smaller sums) due to other creditors. But he showed in the application only 22 cents of land as belonging to him, out of which 7 cents form a paddy field and the balance is garden land. The bank contended, inter alia, that the debtor has a large number of other assets also. The trial court allowed the application on June 8, 1972, and appointed a receiver to take immediate possession of the property shown in the application. Later, an interlocutory application was filed by the bank for a declaration that the document dated August 31, 1967 (styled as partition deed), executed by the debtor al...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »