Kerala Court February 1990 Judgments
Oskar Louis Vs. K.V. Saradha
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-12-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ker137
ORDERK.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J. 1. The second defendant is the revision petitioner.2. The order under challenge is one by which the Court below has allowed the application I.A. No. 3724/ 88 seeking amendment of the plaint. The order reads :--'This is a petition filed by the plaintiff to amend the plaint. The defendant filed strong objections. The main objection is that if it is allowed it will work out injustice to the defendant. I cannot agree with that view. The second objection is that it is highly belated. It is true that the petition is highly belated. It does not mean that the petition cannot be allowed. Hence I allow the petition on payment of cost of Rs. 200/-. For payment of cost.'3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if the amendment is allowed the character of the suit will be changed. In other words the additional facts sought to be introduced in the plaint by the amendment would enable the plaintiff to rest his suit on a different cause of action.4. Is th...
Tag this Judgment!Mani and Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-12-1990
Reported in: [1990]185ITR241(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. The petitioner in 0. P. No. 8307 of 1989 is the appellant in this writ appeal. The respondent is the Revenue. The matter arises under the Income-tax Act. By exhibits P-1 to P-3, the petitioner-firm was assessed for the years 1979-80 and 1980-81. The appeals were disposed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) by exhibits P-4 and P-5. The Revenue, as well as the assessee (appellant) filed appeals before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. These were disposed of by the Appellate Tribunal by exhibit P-6 order. The Appellate Tribunal referred to the orders passed by the Settlement Commission for the prior assessment years and estimated the income at the average rate of 10%. The assessee's appeal was dismissed and the appeal filed by the Revenue was allowed. In the original petition, the attack was against exhibits P-1 to P-3 assessment orders, as affirmed by exhibit P-6 order passed by the Appellate Tribunal.Holding that the assessee has an equally efficacious a...
Tag this Judgment!A.N. Transports Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-12-1990
Reported in: [1990]185ITR134(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. At the instance of an assessee to income-tax, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law for the decision of this court:'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that it was possible to envisage a cost of acquisition with regard to the route permits acquired by the assessee and, consequently, in holding that the claim of the assessee that no tax on capital gains will be attracted to the sale of the route permits is not sustainable ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the claim of the assessee that the cost of improvement of the route permits is not ascertainable and that, consequently, no tax on capital gains is attracted will be sustainable only if it is found that the assessee had improved the route permits after they were acquired by the assessee?' 2. The respondent is the Revenue. We are concerned ...
Tag this Judgment!Poulose Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-12-1990
Reported in: [1991(61)FLR366]; (1991)ILLJ239Ker
Jagannadha Raju, J.1. The first petitioner in O.P.No. 852 of 1985 is the appellant in W.A.No. 27 of 1990. The sole petitioner in O.P.No. 2791 of 1985 is the appellant in W.A. No. 934 of 1989. The two writ petitions were disposed of by a common judgment dated 31st May 1989 and both the writ petitions were dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeals are filed.2. The facts necessary for decision of the controversy in these writ appeals are as follows. These appellants and some others were employees of the Forest Department and long before their retirement, disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against them. While the enquiry proceedings were pending before the Disciplinary Proceedings Tribunal under the Kerala Civil Services (Disciplinary Proceedings Tribunal) Rules, 1960, these persons retired. Subsequently they challenged the continuation of the disciplinary enquiries on the ground that they are not Government servants and that they are retired employees. They also clai...
Tag this Judgment!Narayanan Nair Ramakrishnan Nair and anr. Vs. Zacharia Kuriakose (Died ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-07-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ker152
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the Sub Court, Pathanamithitta in O.S. No. 47 of 1980. The suit was for specific performance of the agreement for sale.2. The plaint averments may briefly be stated as follows : Plaini schedule item No. 1and plaint schedule item No. II building, thereon belonged to the 1st defendant subject to the life-interest of the 2nd defendant. Defendants 1 and 2 executed an agreement evidenced by Ext. Al dated 17-10-1979 agreeing to sell the plaint schedule Item 1 for a sum of Rs. 16,750/- and also agreed to demolish and remove the building shown as item II in the plaint schedule Item 1, at the time of sale and hand over possession of the property to the plaintiff and received a sum of Rs. 3,000/-as advanced. The plaintiff was always ready and willing to pay the balance consideration and get the sale deed executed in his favour. The defendants refused to execute the sale deed on receipt of balance of consideration. In the circumstances...
Tag this Judgment!Balakrishna Transport Vs. Supdt. of Police
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-07-1990
Reported in: (1990)IILLJ16Ker
Sreedharan, J.1. The issues raised in these Original Petitions are inter-connected. So, I consider it advantageous to dispose of the same by a common judgment. I am referring to the parties and exhibits as they are arrayed and marked in O.P.No.6320/1989.2. The short facts necessary for the disposal of these cases are as follows: Petitioner is a stage carriage operator. He owns a fleet of stage carriages. They ply on inter-district routes. Headquarters is in Trichur District. Petitioner has in his employment nearly 130 workers. Majority of the employees are members of 7th respondent trade union. 8th respondent commands second position in terms of numerical strength of members. 9th respondent union was established recently. They have put forward a charter of demands evidenced by Ext.P4. Petitioner moved 6th respondent, the District Labour Officer, Trichur, to take up the demand and to conciliate the matter. While conciliation proceedings were in progress 9th respondent issued Ext. P7 ult...
Tag this Judgment!Brijithamma Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-07-1990
Reported in: (1990)IILLJ104Ker
Sankaran Nair, J.1. This writ petition was registered on the basis of a letter that was published in the 'Malayala Manorama' dated 22nd April 1988, Brijithamma, widow of one Cleetus, portrayed her plight alter her husband's death through the columns of the newspaper aforesaid. It is said that the dead body of Cleetus, a forest guard, was found in a pond, inside the reserve forest. It was a suspected case of homicide, at the hands of persons who had trespassed into the reserved forest for unlawful purposes.2. Notice on the writ petition was issued to the Government on 13th May 1988. Nineteen months later, after several adjournments, on 6th December 1989 a counter affidavit was filed to the effect that report from the Chief Conservator of Forests and District Collector were awaited to decide on the course of action to be taken. An additional counter affidavit was filed on 7th February 1990 stating that a decision had been taken to give appointment to Smt. Brijithamina and that her turn f...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-07-1990
Reported in: II(1990)ACC11
Pareed Pillay, J.1. State of Kerala is the appellant-plaintiff Plaintiff filed the suit for refund of the wharfage amount paid to the defendant on the ground that it happened to be paid solely on the acts of omission on the part of defendant's officials. The Sub Judge held that plaintiff is not entitled to get back the wharfage amount collected by the defendant.2. Steel rods were despatched from Tata Nagar to Punalur Railway Station as per the indent of the Executive Engineer. The consignment was despatched on 8.12.1977. The consignment reached Punalur railway station 1-2.1.1978 in two wagons. Executive Engineer reported for taking delivery of the consignment. Some of the bundles were seen tampered with. Executive Engineer on the same day applied for re-weighment of the goods. The application was allowed on 19.1.1978. The goods were weighed on 10.2.1978 in a weigh bridge in the presence of the Claims Inspector, Southern Railways. On weighment it was found to be only 57.40 tonnes as aga...
Tag this Judgment!Association of Planters of Kerala Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-06-1990
Reported in: [1991]188ITR192(Ker)
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following common question to this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as directed by this court in O.P. Nos. 3256 and 3257 of 1981 F :'On the facts arid in the circumstances of the case, was the Tribunal right in its decision that subscriptions received by the assessee from its members was income liable to be taxed under the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The question was referred at the instance of the assessee. These cases relate to the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74,3. The assessee is a trade association of planters. This association is registered as a company under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956. For the assessment years 1972-73 and 1973-74, the assessee had received Rs. 2,48,372 and Rs. 2,49,589, respectively, by way of subscriptions from its members and Rs. 13,034 and Rs. 14,010, respectively, by way of interest on deposits with banks. The assessee spent in furthe...
Tag this Judgment!C. Bhaskaran Nair Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-06-1990
Reported in: (1990)86CTR(Ker)48; [1990]185ITR15(Ker)
K.A. Nayar, J.1. As directed by this court, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Trivandrum, referred the following questions of law said to arise from the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, in I. T. A. No. 126 (Coch.)/1981 relating to the assessment year 1979-80 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to deduct the amount of interest paid by him to the firm from the total income of the assessee ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to claim deduction of the amount of interest paid onthe amount debited in his account towards the price of share purchased from T. Sumathy Amma and Prabhakaran Nair ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that Section 67(3) is the only section which applies to interest paid by a partner to the firm ? (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trib...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »