Kerala Court July 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.
E.K. Thankappan Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-07-1989
Reported in: 1989CriLJ2374
K.G. Balakrishnan, J.1. This is an appeal against the conviction and sentence entered against the appellant in C.C. 1 of 1984 on the file of the Special Judge (SPE/CBI)-II, Ernakulam. The appellant was found guilty of offences punishable under Sections 409 and 477A, I.P.C. and Section 5(2) and 5(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. For the offence under Sections 477A and 409, I.P.C. the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each and for the offence punishable under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act he is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of I year and to pay a fine of Rs. 15,000/-, and in default of payment of fine he is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year.2. The appellant was a Store-keeper in the Cochin Shipyard during the relevant period. He was initially appointed as a Clerk. On promotion he was appointed as a Storekeeper and he was put in charge of 9 diese...
C. Velayudhan Vs. V.R. Unni and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-06-1989
Reported in: II(1989)ACC529
U.L. Bhat, J.1. In a collision between a jeep and a bus on 6-9-1980 at 2.30 p.m. the jeep was damaged and the driver of the jeep sustained fatal injuries and died instantaneously. The mother, widow and three minor children of the jeep driver filed M.A.C. No. 203 of 1981 claiming compensation of Rs. 1 lakh from the driver, owner and the insurer of the bus. The owner of the jeep filed M.A.C. No. 195/81 claiming Rs. 41,000/- as compensation for the damage caused to the jeep. The claims were resisted. The tribunal held that the accident arose on account of the negligence of the driver of the bus, fixed the compensation payable to the legal representatives of the jeep driver at Rs. 28,000/- and the compensation due to the owner of the jeep at Rs. 27,200/-. The tribunal further directed that the former amount shall be paid with interest at 6% per annum and costs by the driver, owner and insurer of the bus and the latter amount shall be paid with interest at 6% per annum and costs by the driv...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Glory Paul
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-05-1989
Reported in: [1990]186ITR498(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the decision of this court ;'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the Tribunal right in law in holding that no tax on capital gains was leviable on the sale of the land in question ?'2. The respondent is an assessee to income-tax. We are concerned with the assessment year 1980-81. While making the assessment, the assessing authority brought to tax the capital gains arising from the sale of properties by the assessee. The assessee objected to the assessment stating that the property sold was agricultural land. The plea was negatived. In appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the property was situate in the Cochin Corporation area and its sale will attract capital gains under the Income-tax Act. The levy of capital gains, on the profits arising on the sale thereof, was justified. The Appellate Tribunal, relying...
K. Velunni and ors. Vs. Premalatha and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-05-1989
Reported in: II(1989)ACC593
U.L. Bhat, J.1. Velunni, fourth respondent in M.A.C. No. 239 of 1981 and 242 of 1981 is the appellant in M.F.A. No. 601 of 1983 which is preferred against the judgment in M.A.C. No. 242 of 1981 filed by legal representatives of Mohandas. Legal representatives of Pangunni, petitioners in M.A.C. No. 239 of 1981 are the appellants in M.F.A. No. 638 of 1983. They are not parties to M.A.C. No. 242 of 1981 and M.F.A. No. 601 of 1983.2. On 7-61981 at about 515 p.m. when Pangunni was driving from south to north motorcycle KLR 1736 with Mohandas on the pillion at Cherampadam in Kinasseryamsom in Palghat Taluk, stage carriage bus KLP 7933 came from the opposite direction and bit the motorcycle which along with the driver and the pillion rider was dragged over a distance. Both of them sustained fatal injuries and died. Owner, driver and insurer of the bus were impleaded as respondent Nos. 1 to 3 respectively in both the claim petitions. Velunni, owner of the motorcycle, and the insurer of the mot...
T.V. Parangodan Vs. District Collector, Trichur and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-04-1989
Reported in: AIR1989Ker276
S. Padmanabhan, J.1. The short question for consideration in this second appeal filed by the plaintiff is whether the leave of Court required under Section 80(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure for instituting a suit without notice under Sub-section (1) could only be on the basis of an express order on a separate application filed for that purpose. Facts of the case and contentions of the parties are not relevant for deciding the appeal. Both the trial Court and the appellate Court held that a prayer in the plaint is not sufficient and a separate application for leave and an order granting leave are the prerequisites for the maintainability of the suit. Therefore without even considering whether it is a suit to obtain an urgent or immediate relief and whether insistence on the compliance of Sub-section (1) will defeat the purpose of the suit, maintainability of the suit was found against for the simple reason that no application was filed for leave. That finding came only when the suit ...
Shantha Kumar Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-04-1989
Reported in: 1990LC43(Kerala); 1990LC46(Kerala); 1990(47)ELT551(Ker)
V.S. Malimath, C.J.1. The appellant's passport has been seized by the Customs Officer, the appellant having been found with four gold biscuits when he came to India from abroad. It is on the ground of violation of the provisions of the Customs Act that his passport was seized. The appellant sought in the writ petition a direction to the authorities to release the passport, to enable him to go back to Abudabi in connection with the employment which he has secured there. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the authorities are entitled to seize and retain the passport under Section 110(3) of the Customs Act. In this connection the learned Single Judge has followed the judgment of Justice Sukumaran reported in 1986 K.L.T. 884 between Devadasan Devalal and Collector of Customs.2. Section 110(3) of the Customs Act, in terms, empowers the proper officer to seize any documents or things which, in his opinion, will be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding unde...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›