Kerala Court January 1989 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.
United India Insurance Co. Vs. C.S. Gopalakrishnan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-28-1989
Reported in: I(1989)ACC524; (1989)IILLJ30Ker
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. Rajan, a conductor of a bus, died of heart-attack. He died on 15th October, 1981, while he was sleeping in the bus. The end came suddenly before he reached the hospital. The bus in question is KLG 2342.2. The young widow of Rajan along with her minor child, Dileep, filed an application under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). She filed her application on 16th February, 1982, complying with the requirements under Rule 20 of the Kerala Workmen's Compensation Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The widow--the applicant--claimed an amount of Rs. 21,000 as compensation for the death of her husband.3. Opposite party No. 1, the owner of the vehicle, admitted that the deceased, Rajan, was a workman--conductor--employed under him. The monthly wages of Rajan was also admitted. The specific case of opposite party No. 1 is that the death of Rajan is a natural death and will not come under the purview of the...
Associated Transport Corporation (P) Ltd. Vs. National Insurance Co. L ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-28-1989
Reported in: 1(1989)ACC424
P. Krishnamoorthi, J.1. This appeal is by the defendant, a common carrier, in a suit for recovery of loss and damages to the extent of Rs. 9511/-with interest at 12% from 27-12-1975, the total amount claimed being Rs. 13,703/-. This 1st plaintiff is an Insurance Company (hereinafter called the insurer) and the 2nd plaintiff is the consignee of certain goods (hereinafter referred to as the insured). The suit is filed by the 1st plaintiff on its own behalf and as the Power of Attorney holder of the 2nd plaintiff. The plaint allegations are the following. One Maya Agencies entrusted 80 bundles of raw rubber to the defendant, a common carrier, for carriage through its transport service by road from Cochin to Kanpur, under Exts. Al and A2 invoices dated 24-5-1975. The goods had a total weight of 4,000 Kgs. and the consignee was the 2nd plaintiff. It was insured with the 1st plaintiff for Rs. 34,400/- against road risk, theft, pilferage ete. by Ext. A4 policy dated 26-5-1975. According to th...
V.K. Mohammed Vs. R.T.A., Malappuram and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-27-1989
Reported in: AIR1989Ker296
ORDER1. Petitioner along with the 3rd respondent and 12 others wore applicants for grant of a regular stage carriage permit on the route Kuttippuram-Guruvayur. It is a medium route and the petitioner is a medium operator and according to him he satisfies all the requirements for the grant of the permit and is liable to be preferred to the 3rd respondent for the grant. Inter alia the petitioner claims residence and office on the route and he had also specified the vehicle which he was going to offer in his very first representation. The vehicle offered by him was 1986 model one.2. By its proceedings dated 22-3-1986 the Regional Transport Authority (RTA for short) granted the permit to the 3rd respondent. Appeals were filed by the petitioner and three other applicants which were allowed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal on 18-9-1986 and the matter remitted to the RTA for fresh consideration.3. The RTA considered the matter again and by its proceedings Ext. P1 dated 18-10-1986 pre...
A. Abdul Gafoor Kunju Vs. Avva Ummal Pathumma Beevi and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-27-1989
Reported in: 1989CriLJ1224
ORDERChettur Sankaran Nair, J.1. An order of the Court of Session, Trivandrum enhancing maintenance awarded to a divorced Muslim wife and her daughter, after the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the Act') came into force is impugned in these proceedings.2. Maintenance was awarded to the wife and daughter earlier. By M.C. 59/87 they sought enhancement and the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trivandrum declined the prayer, Additional Sessions Judge, revised the order of the Magistrate and enhanced the amount. The enhancement in favour of the daughter is not challenged, and rightly too.3. The question for consideration is, whether a Muslim wife is entitled to invoke Section 127 of the Code after 19-5-86, the date on which the 'Act' came into force. Learned Sessions Judge felt that she could. In his view, the Act supplemented the rights enuring to a divorced Muslim wife under Sections 125 - 128. The reasons for this conclusion, is that there was no re...
K.M. Mathew Vs. P.K. George
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-25-1989
Reported in: [1991]71CompCas568(Ker)
K.T. Thomas, J.1. By writing a false statement in an affidavit or other document, does the maker thereof commit the offence of forgery This question has turned out ultimately to be the decisive one in this appeal filed by a complainant against the order of acquittal. In the complaint, it was alleged that the accused has committed the offence under Sections 465 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code in respect of an affidavit filed before a returning officer appointed to hold elections to the board of directors of a co-operative society. The trial Magistrate, after preliminary enquiry, framed a charge against the accused for the aforesaid offences, but on the conclusion of the trial, he passed a verdict of not guilty. Hence, this appeal by the complainant with special leave.2. The complainant is a member of Koodaranhi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, (for short 'the bank'). The accused was the president of the committee (board of directors, as it is termed differently) of the bank. When the ter...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. India Sea Foods
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-25-1989
Reported in: [1989]178ITR400(Ker)
Paripoornan, J.1. The Revenue is the petitioner herein. The respondent is a firm. It consists of 10 partners. We are concerned with the assessment year 1979-80. The assessee was granted registration for the assessment year 1978-79. For the year 1979-80, admittedly, two partners did not sign in Form No. 12 which is necessary to be filed under Section 184(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Rules 22(5) and 24 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, for continuance of registration. The Income-tax Officer also held that no authorisation or power of attorney was also filed before him. On these premises, the declaration filed in Form No. 12 was held to be not in order to enable the assessee to continue the benefit of registration under the Act. The firm was assessed in the status of an 'unregistered' firm. In appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) accepted the plea of the assessee that there was only some defect in the form filed before the officer (Form No. 12) and so the assessee sh...
Travancore Cements Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-25-1989
Reported in: [1989]178ITR175(Ker)
Paripoornan, J.1. The petitioner-company is an assessee to income-tax. The respondent is the Revenue. We are concerned with the assessment year 1977-78. The assessee received refund of sales tax amounting to Rs. 72,535 during the previous year ended on December 31, 1976, relevant to the assessment year 1977-78. After deducting the amounts returned by the assessee to its customers, the balance was fixed at Rs. 59,772. This amount was brought to tax under Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act. The assessee pleaded that the provisions of Section 41(1) of the Act will not apply. This plea was negatived by the assessing authority, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and by the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal found that an identical plea, on substantially similar facts, was negatived by a Bench of this court in CIT v. Marikar (Motors) Ltd. : [1981]129ITR1(Ker) . Based on the above decision, the Appellate Tribunal held that the matter stands concluded by the decision of this court i...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kerala Financial Corporation
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-25-1989
Reported in: [1989]177ITR483(Ker)
ORDER--Matter remanded by Tribunal--To ascertain whether assessee was banking company and circular dt. 9-10-1984 applicable thereto--No conclusive finding existed.HELD:As to whether the ciruclar issued by the CBDT dt. 9-10-1984, is applicable to the respondent company and if so to what extent, are matters which have been directed by the Applicate Tribunal to be considered afresh by the ITO. The ITO has to adjudicate the said question for the earlier year 1979-80. At this point of time, there is no concluded decision by the Tribunal on this matter. Te decision to be rendered on the said aspect requires factual investigation and the application of the relevant provisions of law. So, the question namely, whether the interest credited to the suspense account could be brought to tax under the IT Act, does not arise out of the appellate order of the Tribunal.Income Tax Act 1961 s.256 Reference--QUESTION OF LAW--Business deduction under s. 36(1)(viii)--Computation--Deduction to be given on gr...
Parapuzha Thamban Alias Jacob Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-25-1989
Reported in: 1989CriLJ1372
P.K. Shamsuddin, J.1. The accused in Sessions Case No. 19 of 1985 on the file of the Court of Sessions, Manjeri is the appellant in this Criminal Appeal.2. The accused was charged for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307, I.P.C. and convicted under Sections 302 and 324, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302, IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 324, I.P.C. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.3. The prosecution case may be summarised as follows : The accused was living in a hut with his wife, Annie, and their six month's old baby by name Abymon. The paternal grandfather of the accused was also living with them, A few days before the occurrence the accused had some urinal complaint and he underwent treatment for that in the Nilambur hospital. After discharge, the accused stopped going for daily labour and there were frequent quarrels between the accused and his wife P.W. 2 regarding this. On 16-6-1984 a...
Joint Receivers of United Film Exhibitors Vs. Commissioner of Income-t ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-24-1989
Reported in: (1989)76CTR(Ker)85; [1989]177ITR518(Ker)
Paripoornan, J. 1. In the Original Petitions Nos. 413 and 571 of 1988, the Revenue is the petitioner. The same respondent in both these original petitions is an assessee to income-tax. The said assessee is the petitionerin Original Petition No, 231 of 1988. The questions of law that arise for consideration in tl e three original petitions are connected and arise out of the same appellate order dated May 29, 1986, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for the year 1979-80.2. We heard counsel for the Revenue as also counsel for the assessee. We are concerned with the assessment year 1979-80. The accounting period is May 23, 1978, to March 31, 1979. The assessees are joint receivers appointed by the court to manage the firm, United Film Exhibitors, Palghat, till the winding up of the firm was complete. Though an array of facts are stated in the original petitions and also in the various annexures, the short question that arises for consideration is, whether the Appellate Tribunal wa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »