Kerala Court March 1991 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.
Harrisons Malayalam Limited Vs. Kerala State Pollution Control Board a ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-27-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker168
ORDERVarghese Kalliath, J.1. Petitioner is a Company registered under the Companies Act. It owns 23 estates in Kerala and 2 estates in Tamil Nadu. The estates owned by the Company in Kerala are rubber estates and tea estates. The Company has tea and rubber factories in almost all the estates. For the purpose of estates, petitioner-company uses water by utilising its own water sourses in the various estates. There had been no levy of water cess on the Company. For the first time, a notice was issued to the Company by the 1st respondent at its Nooply estate directing the petitioner to affix water motors and furnish details of the water consumed every month. Copy of the notice is Ext. P1. Petitioner submits that it is not carrying on any business in any specified industry so as to attract the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). Ext. P1 is a notice issued by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board, the first ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kerala State Drugs and Pharmaceuticals ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-25-1991
Reported in: [1991]192ITR1(Ker)
K.P. Balanarayana Marar, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred to this court for decision :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and considering the mercantile system of accounting followed by the assessee and also considering that the reopening of accounts is impermissible under Indian law, the Tribunal is right in holding - (i) that the amount credited as the price of medicine supplied to Government does not represent accrued income or income received ? (ii) that entries made in accounts represent mere claims ?' 2. The respondent-assessee is a public sector undertaking of the Government of Kerala and the subsidiary of the Kerala State Industrial Enterprises Ltd. It is engaged in the manufacture and sale of pharmaceutical products. We are concerned with the assessment year 1978-79 for which the corresponding previous year ended on March 31, 1978.3. The entire production of the assessee is supplied to the Health Services Dep...
E K Mathew Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-23-1991
Reported in: (1992)104CTR(Ker)5; [1992]195ITR646(Ker); [1992]64TAXMAN176(Ker)
K. P. RADHAKRISHNA MENON J. - The common question referred for our opinion read :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tea bushes cannot be characterised as growing crops ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the rubber trees are not exempt from wealth-tax under section 5(1)(viiia) of the wealth-tax Act ?'The years of assessment are 1973-74, 1974-75, 1975-76. The claim of the assessee for exemption is based on section 5(1)(viiia) of the Wealth-tax Act as it stood then. That means that the assets made mention of in this clause namely, growing crops (including fruits of trees) on agricultural land and grass on such land shall not be included in the net wealth of the assessee. This claim was, however, rejected by the Wealth-tax Officer. The appeal taken therefrom before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, however, was not successful. The Tribunal before which the assessee challenged the order was of the view that the claim was not ...
Rajan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-22-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ575
K.T. Thomas, J.1. This case belongs to the series of killing spree indulged in by some R.S.S. loyalists and Marxist Party followers against each other in Kerala. Deceased, an R.S.S. activist or loyalist earned a sobriquet 'Wayanadan Thampan'. He was earlier involved in another murder case in which a marxist follower was killed. As he was acquitted by the Court, he became the prime target for retaliation by the other side. On 3-8-1984 he was chased by some assailants and was killed by throwing bombs (or hand grenade) at him. One bomb hit him and exploded. It smashed his head. Four persons were indicted for his murder. But, Sessions Court convicted only the appellant (who is none other than the first cousin of deceased) for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Indian Explosives Act. He has been sentenced to imprisonment for life for the first Count, but no separate sentence was awarded for the other count.2. Summary of the case is this : In revenge ...
Thomas Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-22-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ581
P.K. Shamsuddin, J.1. Appellant challenges the conviction and sentence of imprisonment for life entered against him by the Sessions Court. Trichur for offence punishable under Section 302, I.P.C.2. The act attributed to the appellant is that he fisted Rappai (now deceased) with hand and caused the death of Rappai due to subdural haematoma.3. The appellant and Rappai were neighbours. However, on account of some boundary disputes, they were on inimical terms and many cases, both criminal and civil, were pending between them, and in one case the appellant was fined Rs. 500/-. On 17-2-1985 around 5 p.m. Rappai was going from north to south along Panokaran Road in Kanimangalam and when he reached in front of the house of one Viswambharan, the appellant, who was coming in the opposite direction fisted Rappai twice or three times above the right eye. Rappai sat down with pain and the accused ran away from the scene. PW 1 who was coming behind Rappai and PW 2 who was behind the appellant saw t...
Sathyavathy Vs. Bhargavi (Died), Vijayan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-21-1991
Reported in: AIR1991Ker377
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. A question of some difficulty arises in this case. Petitioner before us is a decree-holder. The respondents are the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor. Petitioner secured a decree for Rs. 5,000/- with interest. This amount of Rs. 5,000/- was borrowed by the wife of the 2nd respondent. The wife of the 2nd respondent and the petitioner were teachers in St. John Bosco's Lower Primary School.2. Petitioner instituted a suit, O.S. No. 1142/86 and obtained a decree. Petitioner filed an execution petition for realisation of an amount of Rs. 7,627.75 as E. P. No. 676/87. Petitioner wanted to attach the provident fund and gratuity amounts due to the deceased wife of the 2nd respondent. It is in evidence that the 1st respondent, i.e., the deceased wife of the 2nd respondent is entitled to get an amount of Rs. 11,000/- as provident fund and nearly an amount of Rs. 17,000/- as gratuity. This amount has to be obtained from the Assistant Educational Officer, Cherpu. ...
Abdulla Mohammed Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-21-1991
Reported in: [1991]192ITR491(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 is justified in law in disallowing a sum of Rs. 1,25,000 claimed as loss for the assessment year 1972-73 ?'2. The respondent is the Revenue. The matter relates to the assessment, year 1972-73 for which the accounting period ended on March 31, 1972, The assesses is an individual. On August 18, 1971, the Central Excise authorities intercepted his car near Kasargod in which the assessee was travelling alone. On search, the authorities found a carton of English crockery articles and a bag containing negotiable instruments such as bank drafts, travellers cheques and foreign currency notes which amounted, in terms of Indian currency in value, to more than a lakh of rupees. The assessee admitted that he was the owner of the car and that, on August 16, 1971, when he was in Bombay, a person by name ...
K.V. Sugathan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-21-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2211
S. Padmanabhan, J.1. Accused is the appellant. Though he was tried for offences punishable under Sections 161 and 201 of the I.P.C. and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption act, conviction is only for the offence under Section 161 of the Penal Code. Sentence awarded is fine of Rs. 3,000/-.2. He was the District Social Welfare Officer, Ernakulam and District President of the Kerala State Social Welfare Employees' Association (Association). P.W. 1 Elsy was the President of the Deseeya Vanitha Sangham, Vaduthala, which was running a feeding centre (Centre) for the benefit of children in need of nutritious food under the World Health Programme at her residence. Appellant was the person responsible for passing indent for supply of food articles to the Centre. Prosecution case is that on 20-3-85, as a motive or reward for passing indent for supply of wheat, he demanded Rs. 200/-from PW 1 and received Rs. 150/- from her on 27-3-1985 and thereafter dishonestly created false evidence an...
M.A. Razzak Vs. Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Trivandrum ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-20-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker143
ORDERK.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J.1. Ext. P7 is under challenge. The first respondent by Ext.P7 order has issued the following direction :'The Enquiry Officer, should conduct the enquiry, under Section 68 of the Act, after observing rules, procedures and all formalities required in this respect. The amount involved and the persons responsible for the loss should be assessed correctly. The Enquiry report with supporting records if any, should be submitted within three weeks from the date of this order,'2. The learned counsel for the petitionersubmits that the Joint Registrar has not complied with the procedure prescribed under Sections 65 and 66 of the Co-operative Societies Act read with Rule 66 of The Rules framed under. The Co-operative Societies Act while passing Ext. P7 order; that even according to the first respondent Ext. P7 order is based only on the inspection report of the second respondent within the meaning of Section 66 of the Act; that the second respondent happened to cond...
Kesavan Velayudhan Vs. Kannan Kunjukutty and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-15-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker163
L. Manoharan, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant. Suit was for declaration of easement right and for consequential mandatory injunction.2. The facts in brief are as follows:--Anjilichal, a tributary of Moovattupuzha river runs east to west on the south of the property that belongs to the first defendant. The properties situated on the north of the same belongs to defendants 2 to 6. Moovattupupzha river is on the west. According to the plaintiff a canal from the said Anjilichal runs towards north through the property of first defendant and second defendants, proceeds further north touching the eastern side of the property that belongs to defendants 3 and 5; then it goes further north touching the western side of the plaint schedule item No. I that belongs to the plaintiff and reaches its north-western corner. Plaintiff alleged he and his predecessors were using the canal from ancient time as of right for the purpose of irrigation and also for taking manure to his property. Plaint schedule ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »