Kerala Court May 1990 Judgments
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. K. Savithri and ors. and Lalitha and o ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-31-1990
Reported in: II(1990)ACC505; 1990ACJ768
K.T. Thomas, J.1. The simple question in these appeals is whether the insurer can be saddled with liability under Section 92A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'the Act'), without determining the dispute that the insurance policy became invalid as a consequence of violation of a condition in the policy. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded compensation in two cases to the injured under Section 92A and directed the owner and the insurer to pay the amount. The Claims Tribunal observed that, in the light of the decision in Mohammad Iqbal v. Bhimaiah, AIR 1985 Kar 171 ; [1985] ACJ 546 ; [1986] 60 Comp Cas 1094 the objection regarding violation of policy condition need not be considered when the award is passed on the principle of 'no fault liability'. The insurance company has filed these appeals.2. Section 92A provides that 'where the death or permanent disablement of any person has resulted from an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle or motor vehicles, the ...
Tag this Judgment!CochIn Devaswom Board Vs. Government of India and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-31-1990
Reported in: [1991]188ITR8(Ker)
K.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J.1. The Cochin Devaswom Board, a body constituted under the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, hereinafter referred to as 'the Board' is the petitioner.2. Accepting the Board's application exhibit P-2, the Central Government issued exhibit P-3 notification which reads :'In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (v) of Sub-section (23C) of Section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby notifies 'Cochin Devaswom Board, Trichur' for the purpose of the said Section for and from the assessment year 1972-73.'3. By virtue of this notification, the petitioner-Board has been enjoying income-tax exemption since the assessment year 1972-73. The validity of the above notification is purported to be limited by the Central Board of Direct Taxes to the assessment year 1984-85, as evidenced by exhibit P-4. It has further been stated in exhibit P-4 that if the petitioner-Board wanted extension of the tax exemption ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rajagiri Rubber and Produce Co. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-31-1990
Reported in: [1991]189ITR182(Ker)
K.S. Paripooknan, J. 1. The Income tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following three questions of law for the decision of this court :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the rubber replanting subsidy is assessable as the assessee's income ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is liable to capital gains on the sale of 3,386 trees ? (3) If the assessee is liable to capital gains on the sale of the trees, whether the fair market value as on January 1, 1964, would not be less than the sale proceeds it fetched on the sale of the trees ?' 2. The respondent-company is an assessee engaged in the rubber plantation industry. We are concerned with the assessment year 1979-80. During the relevant year, the assessee received an amount of Rs. 1,04,106 as rubber replanting subsidy from the Rubber Board. It was claimed as non-taxable. The Income-tax Officer rejected this plea and held that the rubber replanting subsidy is a re...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Savithri
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-31-1990
Reported in: I(1991)ACC85
Thomas, J.1. The simple question in these appeals is whether the insurer can be saddled with liability under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'the Act') without determining the dispute that the insurance policy became invalid as a consequence of violation of a condition in the policy. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded compensation in two cases to the injured under Section 92A and directed the owner and his insurer to pay the amount. The Claims Tribunal observed that in the light of the decision in Mohammed Iqbal v. Bhimaiah and Ors. AIR 198S Kar. 171 :1985 (2) ACC 289 that the objection regarding violation of policy condition need not be considered when the award is passed on the principle of 'no fault liability'. The Insurance Company has filed these appeals.2. Section 92-A provides that 'Where the death or permanent disablement of any person has resulted from an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle or motor vehicles, the owner of the vehicle...
Tag this Judgment!T. Varghese and ors. Vs. Kerala State Road Trans. Corpn. and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-29-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ29
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. One Suresh Wilfred, an 18 years old college student met with an accident. It was a fatal accident. He succumbed to the injuries. It happened on 6.3.1982.2. Suresh Wilfred was a passenger in the K.S.R.T.C. bus. It is stated that the driver was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently and a sudden swerve to left and right caused a shocking jerk and the deceased, who was standing near the footboard, was thrown out. His head hit against a telephone post causing skull and brain injuries. He was taken to the hospital and there he breathed his last.3. The claimants are the legal heirs of the deceased. The claimants wanted a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- under different heads. Evidence was adduced in the case. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence in the case, found that the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 42,000/-. Of course, the Tribunal found the total loss of dependency at Rs. 50,400/-. After deducting a sum of Rs. 8,400/- for imponderables...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›