Kerala Court June 1990 Judgments
Choorakadan Alias Rayyappadan Sanku and ors. Vs. Antony
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-29-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ker44
K.G. Balakrishnan, J.1. The short question that arises for consideration in this second appeal is whether a party aggrieved by the dismissal of an application under Order XXXIX, Rule 2A of C.P.C. filed for taking action for disobedience or breach of injunction, can challenge the same in an appeal filed under Order XLI, Rule 1 against the original decree, without recourse to a separate appeal as provided under Order XLIII, Rule 1(r) of the Code.The facts necessary for a decision on this point are as follows: Defendants in O.S. 600 of 1982 on the file of the Munsiffs Court. Trichur are the appellants. The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 7 from entering into the plaint schedule property, cutting and removing trees therefrom and from making a road through any portion of the plaint property. In the suit the respondent contended that on the western side of the plaint property there is a panchayat road lying north to south and another panchayat...
Tag this Judgment!Jose Vs. Ali Joseph
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-29-1990
Reported in: I(1991)DMC392
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. A well educated young couple with two children are before us. The husband filed a petition under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act, for short, the Act, to shap the marriage tie by a decree of the court dissolving the marriage with his wife, the counter petitioner Their marriage was on 21-5-1979. Parties belong to Roman Catholic Community and their marriage was solemnised at the Bishop's House, Kottayam. After the marriage, the counter petitioner gave birth to two children,2. Section 10 of the Act provides that a husband may present a petition to the District Court or to the High Court praying that his marriage may be dissolved on the ground that his wife has, since the solemnization thereof, been guilty of adultery. The provision for dissolution of marriage, particularly, a dissolution at the instance of the husband, is a very stringent provision. The husband is entitled to claim divorce only if the wife is found to be guilty of adultery. Even in a case where...
Tag this Judgment!Damodara Nayak Vs. Vatsala Nayak and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-28-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Ker348
P.K. Shamsuddin, J. 1. The defendant in O.S. No. 34 of 1981 on the file of the Sub Court, Kasaragod is the appellant. The suit was for recovery of a sum of Rs. 40,652.42 due to the plaintiffs by way of owelty charged on the plaint schedule property.2. Vamana Naik, the husband of 1st plaintiff and father of plaintiffs 2 to 5 was one of the parties to a family partition Ext. A1 dated 17-3-1961. Defendant was also a party to the partition. The plaint A schedule properties were B schedule properties in the said partition and they were allotted to the share of the defendant. C schedule properties in the partition were allotted to the plaintiffs' predecessor Vamana Naik, who died subsequently. The partition deed contained a stipulation that the defendant would pay two candies of areca by the Vishu of each year an owelty to the share of deceased Vamana Naik and a charge was created therefor on the plaint A schedule properties. Interest at 5% per annum on the value of the defaulted supply of t...
Tag this Judgment!The State Vs. Raman
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-28-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1967
M.M. Pareed Pillay, J.1. State has filed the appeal challenging the finding of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Irinjalakuda that the accused (respondent) committed offence only under Section 324 and not under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The prosecution case is that on 7-1-1985 at about 12.15 p.m. accused attempted to commit murder of Thomas (P.W.4) by voluntarily causing grievous hurt to him by beating on his head and chest several times with crow bar. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge held that the offences under Sections 307 and 325 have not been established and the prosecution has succeeded only in establishing the guilt of the accused under Section 324 of the I.P.C. This finding has been challenged by the State.3. M.O. I'llavanku' has a length of 115 cm. The wound certificate Ext. P-2 shows that P.W.4 had sustained lacerated wounds. Ext. P-2 also shows that there was suspected fracture of skull bone. P.W.4 was treated in the Medical College Hospital.4. A formidable wea...
Tag this Judgment!Saraswathi Amma and ors. Vs. Radhamma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ker86
S. Padmanabhan, J.1. Some interesting questions of law were raised before me in this appeal filed by the defendant and the memorandum of cross-objection filed by the plaintiffs.2. First plaintiff is a Marumakkathayee Nair lady, who was unmarried and issueless when her tharavad got divided in December, 1953. Ten items of landed properties, including the three plaint schedule items, were allotted to her share. She was married in 1957 and plaintiffs 2 to 4 were born. She is a teacher, who lived with her elder brother Parameswara Menon till she was transferred outside station. He was managing her properties and collecting rent and income on her behalf. Her share included a building, which stood in the share allotted to another member. Parameswara Menon acted as her agent for demolition of that building and constructing one in Item No. 1. When he lost his own house by alienation, he was permitted to occupy that building with defendants, who are his widow and children. Menon died in 1981. Si...
Tag this Judgment!Elizabeth Joseph Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-1990
Reported in: [1991]187ITR117(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. At the instance of an assessee to income-tax, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the decision of this court:'Whether, the Tribunal was right in finding that 'the unregistered written agreement dated January 26, 1973, is a sale itself and that, therefore, the capital asset was transferred on January 26, 1973, for a specific price of Rs. 6,25,000' and was the Tribunal right in finding that 'the capital gain is to be assessed on that basis' ?'2. We are concerned with the assessment year 1973-74. The respondent is the Revenue, The assessee herein is the owner of an estate, along with her father-in-law. By a deed dated January 26, 1973, the owners of the estate, the assessee and her father-in-law, sold the trees in the estate to one S.K. Abdul Wahab. The question arose as to whether the deed dated January 26, 1973, is only an agreement to sell or a sale itself. The assessing authority held that the deed represented a sale ...
Tag this Judgment!M.D. Joseph (Legal Heir of Late M.V. Dominic) Vs. Commissioner of Inco ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-1990
Reported in: [1991]187ITR112(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. At the instance of an assessee to income-tax, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the decision of this court: 'Whether the Tribunal was right in finding that the unregistered written agreement dated January 26, 1973, is a sale itself and that, therefore, the capital asset was transferred on January 26, 1973, for a specified price of Rs. 6,25,000 and was the Tribunal right in finding that the capital gains is to be assessed on that basis ?' 2. The respondent is the Revenue. We are concerned with the assessment year 1973-74 for which the accounting period ended on March 31, 1973. One Shri M.V. Dominic and his daughter-in-law purchased 403 acres of coffee plantation at Nelliampathi in Pollachi on March 26, 1968. Mr. Dominic was entitled to half share. The daughter-in-law was entitled to half share, On January 26, 1973, an agreement was entered into between the said persons and one S. K. Abdul Wahab for the sale of shade ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Calicut Modern Spinning and Weaving Mil ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-1990
Reported in: [1990]186ITR509(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions of law, for the decision of this court, in the above two referred cases :'Income-tax Reference No. 143 of 1987 : (1) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of the Payment of Bonus Act were not applicable to the goodwill bonus paid by the assessee to its employees and the managing director on the basis of agreement with the employees and on the basis of terms and conditions of the services of the managing director ? (2) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the aforesaid payment was made on grounds of business expediency and, therefore, was an allowable deduction even under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' Income-tax Reference No. 147 of 1987 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction of the bonus paid in excess of the...
Tag this Judgment!G. Parameswaran Nair Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2011
M.M. Pareed Pillay, J.1. Appellant is the accused in C.C. 13 of 1987 of the Court of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Trivandrum. Accused challenges the conviction and sentence entered against him by the Special Judge.2. The Special Judge held that in respect of transactions 5 to 11 there is absolutely no acceptable evidence. With regard to items 1 to 4 the Special Judge held that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing its case against the accused.3. Appellant raised three contentions before this Court. His first contention is that Special Judge had no jurisdiction to try the case as when the Court framed charge on 18-1-1984 the accused was not a Government servant as he had already retired from service. Accused retired from service on 30-4-1983. The Court framed charge on 18-1-1984. The prosecution case is that the accused misappropriated Rupees 9,781.60 during 21-3-1978 to 23-3-1978. Admittedly during that period accused was a Government servant and as the offences were...
Tag this Judgment!P.V. Jacob Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-26-1990
Reported in: [1991]192ITR196(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. At the instance of an assessee to wealth-tax, 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, the Tribunal is right in law in confirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ?' 2. The applicant is an assessee to wealth-tax. The question of law posed herein relates to the assessment years 1974-75 and 1975-76. The relevant valuation dates are March 31, 1974 and March 31, 1975. The respondent is the Revenue. The assessee returned a net wealth of Rs. 5,28,800 and Rs. 3,86,058, respectively, for the assessment years 1974-75 and 1975-76. The assessee is a partner in M/s. Varkey Jacob and Co. with 3/5ths share. The firm had taken on lease a rubber estate. The estate was acquired by the State of Kerala under the Land Acquisition Act. The Wealth-tax Officer found that an amount of Rs. 9,25,000 was awarded to the firm towardscompensation f...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »