Kerala Court February 1990 Judgments
T.C. Kuruvila Vs. Managing Director, Southern Roadways Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-22-1990
Reported in: II(1990)ACC399; 1991ACJ16
K.T. Thomas, J.1. In a motor accident which happened on 9.6.1974, the appellant sustained injuries. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 33,000/- as compensation and directed the owner and driver of lorry TNE 421 to pay the awarded sum with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of claim petition. Dissatisfied with the amount awarded, this appeal has been filed by the appellant.2. The appellant and his wife were travelling in a taxi car along the national highway. As the car reached the scene of accident, the lorry, which came from the opposite direction, collided with the taxi car. Among the injuries which appellant sustained, the serious one was a penetrating injury in his left eye, besides a lacerated wound starting from root of nose extending up to the left eyebrow, cutting the upper eyelid. He filed the claim petition on 21.11.1979 with an application to condone delay, claiming an amount of Rs. 33,000/-. The delay was condoned and the claim ...
Tag this Judgment!K. Kunjamma and ors. Vs. Bhageerathy Amma Gomathy Amma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-19-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ker111
1. This second appeal arises from a final decree for redemption of a mortgage. The preliminary decree passed on 19-1-1970 directed the plaintiff-mortgagor to deposit the mortgage amount of Rs. 154.40 and an amount of Rs. 200/- towards value of improvements within a period of two months from that date or any later date up to which the payment may be extended by the Court. It was further directed that on such payment the defendant-mortgagee shall deliver up all the documents in his possession and re-convey the property free from all encumbrances. Plaintiff did not deposit the amount within the prescribed time, nor did he seek extension of time to make the deposit. In the meantime he died. The 1st defendant also died since the date of the decree. An application was filed by the legal representatives of deceased plaintiff on 2-2-1977 as LA. No. 388/1977 for passing a final decree after recording them as the legal representatives and permitting them to make the necessary deposit. Request wa...
Tag this Judgment!Philippose Cherian and anr. Vs. T.A. Edward Lobo and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-19-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ634
K.T. Thomas, J.1. A claim made on the owner and driver of a stage carriage bus KLK 7221 for compensation arising from death of a young man in a motor accident was dismissed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The claimants are the father and mother of the deceased. Claims Tribunal found that there is no proof of negligence in driving the bus. This appeal is by the claimants.2. The facts, in short, are these: The accident happened on 18.9.1982 around 2 p.m. The deceased, a second year B.Com. student, was riding his bicycle from west to east along Changanacherry-Karukachal road. The bus came from opposite direction and knocked him down. Consequently, the cyclist sustained serious injuries and later he succumbed to his injuries on the same day while undergoing treatment in the hospital. The claim was for Rs. 1,00,000/- after defraying a sum of Rs. 5,000/- already received from the owner of the bus. The claim was resisted, inter alia, on the ground that the accident happened due to the...
Tag this Judgment!Philippose Cheiran and anr. Vs. T.A. Edward Lobo and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-19-1990
Reported in: II(1991)ACC585
K.T. Thomas, J.1. A claim made on the owner and driver of a stage carrier bus KLK 7221 for compensation arising from death of a young man in a motor accident was dismissed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The claimants are the father and mother of the deceased. Claim Tribunal found that there is no proof of negligence in driving the bus. The appela is by the claimants.2. The facts, in short, are these: The accident happened on 18.9.1982 around 2p.m. The deceased, a second year B.Com. student, was. riding his bicycle from west to east along Changanacherry-Karukachal road. The bus came from opposite direction and knocked him down . Consequently, the cyclist sustained serious injuries and later he succumbed to his injuries on the same day while undergoing treatment in the hospital. The claim was for Rs. 1,00,000/- after defraying a sum of Rs. 5,000/- already received from the owner of the bus. The claim was resisted, inter alia on the ground that the accident happened due to the neg...
Tag this Judgment!Annathu Sarojini and ors. Vs. Muhammed Sainulabdeen and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-16-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Ker248
Varghese Kalliath, J. 1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs. They filed the suit for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property on the strength of their title to the property. The plaintiffs are four ladies. Admittedly they have got title to the property. The defendants do not dispute the title of the plaintiffs.2. The first defendant executed an agreement dated 30-5-1970. This agreement is a registered agreement. By virtue of this agreement now the defendants says that the first defendant was put in possession of the suit property as a licensee. It was stipulated in the agreement that the agreement will operate from 1-6-1970 and that for the grant of the licence, the first defendant has to pay Rs. 166.66. The property was given for a definite purpose, viz., to make certain structures for the purpose of running a cinema theatre. The permission was granted for a fixed period, viz., 5 years. The first defendant was thus continuing possssion of the property in question. While...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala and anr. Vs. V.P. Muralidharan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-15-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ker89
Thomas, J.1. The award passed by an Arbitrator was made the rule of the Court, and a decree was passed in terms of the award. The State of Kerala and the Superintending Engineer concerned, having failed to get the award set aside, filed this appeal.2. Different questions, both of law and fact, were canvassed in this appeal including the very appointment of an Arbitrator to decide the disputes. When it was pointed out that the Government did not file any appeal against the order by which the disputes were referred to arbitration, learned Government Pleader made an endeavour to invoke the powers of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution for quashing the appointment order.3. Some facts, relevant for this appeal, are the following: Respondent was engaged to carry out the work for making approach road to Mamom bridge for which an agreement was executed by him in favour of the Governor of Kerala. The site was handed over to him on 14-9-84. The work should have been completed on or ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rubro Fibre Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-15-1990
Reported in: [1990]184ITR596(Ker)
The judgment of the court was delivered byK. S. PARIPOORNAN J. - 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 circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in remanding the matter without considering the question whether the assessee is entitled to the benefit of section 80J for the entire period ?'The respondent is a private limited company. We are concerned with the assessment year 1975-76 for which the previous year ended on March 31, 1975. The assessee was carrying on the business of manufacture of durofoam. A new unit was set up in Bangalore for the manufacture of the same product. The plea was that the unit was set up on January 20, 1975. The assessing authority stated that the unit commenced production only in February, 1975. The assessee claimed deduction of Rs. 80,202 under section 80J calculated at 6% on a sum of Rs. 13,36,700 as capital employed....
Tag this Judgment!Malayalam Plantations (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-13-1990
Reported in: [1990]184ITR505(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. These are two connected cases. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred these cases at the instance of an assessee to income-tax. Income-tax Reference No. 90 of 1984 relates to the assessment year 1977-78 and Income-tax Reference No. 89 of 1984 relates to the assessment year 1978-79. We are concerned, in these cases, with regard to the eligibility of the assessee for the deduction of amounts paid or payable by way of bonus for the said two years. The assessee is a non-resident sterling company. It is running tea and rubber plantations in Kerala and Tamilnadu. Admittedly, it keeps its accounts on the mercantile basis. The accounting period for the above two assessment years ended on March 31, 1977, and March 31, 1978, respectively. The respondent is the Revenue in both the cases.2. The questions of law referred in Income-tax Reference No. 90 of 1984 (relating to the assessment year 1977-78) and Income-tax Reference No. 89 of 1984 (relating to...
Tag this Judgment!Talayar Tea Co. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-13-1990
Reported in: 1993(64)ELT13(Ker)
ORDERK.S. Paripoornan, J.1. At the instance of an assessee the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, South Regional Bench at Madras (in short, the Tribunal) has referred the following three questions of law for the decision of this Court:'1. Whether under the provisions of Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, as it existed then, an application for refund has to be made to the concerned Assistant Collector?2. Whether any person claiming refund of any duty paid by him could make an application addressed to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise and submit the same to the Superintendent under whose jurisdiction the claimant's factory is situated?3. Whether, in the latter event, for computing the time limit of six months under Rule 11, the date of receipt of application by the concerned Superintendent of Central Excise should be taken as the date of receipt of the application by the proper authority :-(a) at any time?(b) on or after 23-5-1979, the date of the Trad...
Tag this Judgment!Killath Parambil Hemza and anr. Vs. Pakiriperambil Abdulla and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-13-1990
Reported in: 1990ACJ1103
U.L. Bhat, J. 1. First respondent herein was travelling in an autorickshaw belonging to the first appellant on 9.6.1984. The autorickshaw capsized and the passenger sustained grievous injuries. Alleging that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the autorickshaw, the passenger filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs. 75,000/-. The claim was opposed on the ground that it was a case of an inevitable accident. The amount claimed also was challenged as excessive. The Tribunal upheld the claim of the claimant to the extent of Rs. 41,000/- directing the driver, owner and insurer to pay the amount with interest and costs. The owner and insurer of the vehicle have filed the appeal. The claimant has filed cross-objection.2. The claimant, examined as PW 1, and an independent witness examined as PW 2 uniformly deposed that the autorickshaw was being driven at an excessive speed and on that account it suddenly capsized injuring the ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »