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.
Sarada and anr. Vs. Chakkunny and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-15-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker249
ORDERG.H. Guttal, J.1. This petition by the heirs of the deceased plaintiff, arises out of their application for bringing them on the record, as legal representatives of the deceased. But it raises an interesting question relating to the application of the traditional Hindu Law of Kerala to the determination of the petitioners' status as the legal representatives. The question arises out of the facts set out in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 below.2. The petitioners, Sarada and Subhadra, are the daughters of the sister of Velayudhan, son of Mundatharayil Krishnan, the sole plaintiff in G.S. 144 of 1990 instituted in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Trichur, in which a decree in favour of the plaintiff was made. Firstly, the decree dated 30-11-1985 declares that: (i) the property surrounding the temple, the temple itself and the 'accessories' are the common property of the Mundan-thara tarwad which includes the plaintiff and the defendants; and (ii) every member of the tarwad has a right to w...
The New India Assurance Company Limited, Trivandrum Vs. Syed Mohammed, ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-15-1991
Reported in: AIR1991Ker368
Sukumaran, J.1. Kerala is caressed by a sea coast all along. On the western horizon it is is the sea, as far as eyes could see; and close by is a deeper ocean. Adventurous fishermen, set out in the traditional boats with their oars and sails, to collect from the depths, much of fishery wealth and haul them to the shore. The debut of mechanised vessels brought about visible changes in the economy and export performance of the State. Increased activities into uncertain waters and in unpredictable weather, had their attendant perils and risks for the boats and the crew. Modern business organisations plan in advance the averting of unexpected tragedies. Insurance was necessarily popular with the fishing vessels. Such insurance policies, by and large, were modulated on the settled forms of marine policies. The terms and conditions, the warranties and the exemptions, were all there -- sometimes loosely couched and sometime wrongly understood. Warranties certainly had their legal significatio...
Vavachan Vs. Kerala State Road Trans. Corpn. and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-15-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ191
Sankaran Nair, J.1. Petitioner seeks appropriate directions to command the second respondent, District Collector, Kottayam, to recover a sum of Rs. 34,358.20 from the first respondent Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, called 'K.S.R.T.C.' hereinafter, pursuant to the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam in O.P. (MV) No. 127 of 1987 and pay the same to him. Petitioner suffered injuries on being knocked down by a bus belonging to the first respondent and driven by one of its employees on 31.10.1986. He moved the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and an award was passed. It is submitted by both sides that the first respondent K.S.R.T.C., has not filed an appeal the award.2. I have heard the standing counsel for the first respondent. First respondent has no valid excuse for not remitting the amount. Nor, has the second respondent any justification for not recovering the amount. In the circumstances, the second respondent is directed to take necessary action, realise t...
Vavachan Vs. Kerala State Rtc and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-15-1991
Reported in: I(1993)ACC73
Sankaran Nair, J.1. Petitioner seeks appropriate directions to command the second respondent, District Collector, Kottayam, to recover a sum of Rs. 34,358.20 from the first respondent Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, called 'K.S.R.T.C.' hereinafter, pursuant to the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam in O.P. (MV) No. 127 of 1987 and pay the same to him. Petitioner suffered injuries on being knocked down by a bus belonging to the first respondent and driven by one of its employees on 31.10.1986. He moved the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and an award was passed. It is submitted by both sides that the first respondent K.S.R.T.C., has not filed an appeal against the award.2. I have heard the standing counsel for the first respondent. First respondent has no valid excuse for not remitting the amount. Nor, has the second respondent any justification for not recovering the amount. In the circumstances, the second respondent is directed to take necessary action, re...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Antony Mendez
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-14-1991
Reported in: [1991]191ITR346(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following question of law to this court under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act' for short) :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the mandatory provisions of Rule 1D, the Tribunal is justified in interfering with the valuation of shares by the Wealth-tax Officer ?'2. When the reference came up before the Division Bench of two of us, namely, Paripoornan and K. A. Nayar JJ., i -was felt that the question referred did not truly reflect the matter in controversy and, accordingly, this court amended the question referred and formulated the following question of law as the real question arising for decision :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in interfering with the valuation of shares made by the Wealth-tax Officer ?'3. In view of the sharp conflict of judicial opinion that pr...
Shri C.N. Presannan, Judl. Second Class Magistrate Vs. Shri K.A. Moham ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-14-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2194
K. Sukumaran, J.1. This is an action on the Contempt of Courts Act. The respondent is a Member of the Bar. The proceedings were initiated on a reference made by the Judicial Magistrate of the II Class, Cochin.2. At every stage of the proceedings, there were obstructions posed by objections of the respondent. It is unnecessary to allude to these antecedent events. The Bench before which the matter had come up (Paripoornan and Jagannadha Raju, JJ.), directed that the matter may be placed before another Bench. It was so done after elaborate orders have been passed on some among the contentions raised by the respondent. We too had to deal with a spate of petitions, raising a variety of contentions intended to halt and to end the proceedings. Those petitions have been dealt with from time to time. (See orders in C.M.P. Nos. 16654, 16655, 16656 and 19370 of 1990).3. The charge was, framed on 4-10-1990. The gravamen of the charge is that the respondent organised and caused the staging of a de...
C.N. Presannan Vs. K.A. Mohamed Ali
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-14-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2205
K. Sukumaran, J.1. The respondent stands charged with a commission of a criminal contempt of Court, as defined in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1959. The gist of the charge is that he contemptuously addressed the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Fort Cochin and threatened the Magistrate by standing close to the dais and shouting at him the words:'Why can't you write down my questions? Why are you afraid to write down my question? Why should the Court have a fear';and he shouted aggressively and in an in-disciplined manner:'You must record my questions'2. The Magistrate made a reference to this Court. On 27-3-1989, a Division Bench of this Court, Justice Paripoornan and Justice Nayar, ordered:'We are satisfied that a prima facie case is made out'.Notice was accordingly issued to the respondent. Sri M. K. Damodaran appeared on his behalf. Arguments in the matter were heard, presumably on a preliminary basis on various days. On 13-6-1989, the Court posted the case for order to be pronounce...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mrs. Annamma Alexander and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-13-1991
Reported in: [1991]191ITR551(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for the decision of this court in the above referred cases :'R. A. No. 160(Coch) of 1983 : 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of interest receipt on the mesne profits is income under the Income-tax Act R. A. No. 161(Coch) of 1983 : 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the entire interest receipt as per the judgment of the High Court passed on December 23, 1965, is assessable in the assessment year 1966-67 3. Should not the Tribunal have considered the question of the year or years in which the amount is to be assessed ?' 2. The assessee is common in both the cases. Both the cases relate to the assessment year 1966-67 for which the accounting period ended on March 31, 1966. The references arise out of the common appellate order passed by the Appellate Tribunal dated March 14, 1983, in I. T. A....
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Mulam Club
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-13-1991
Reported in: (1991)99CTR(Ker)124; [1991]191ITR370(Ker)
K.P. Balanarayana Marar, J. 1. A common question arises in these references at the instance of the Revenue. The question is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in finding that the assessee-club cannot be assessed in the status of an 'individual' and that since an 'association of persons' is not an assessable entity for the purpose of wealth-tax, it cannot be charged to wealth-tax ?'2. The respondent is a members' club by name Sri Mulam Club, Thiruvananthapuram. The Wealth-tax Officer treated the club as an individual and subjected it to wealth-tax for the assessment years 1970-71 to 1978-79. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner cancelled the assessment On further appeal, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, upheld the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner holding that the members' club, being an association of persons, is not an individual and hence is not an assessable entity for the purpose of wealth-tax. It is, th...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. O. Jameela Beevi and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-11-1991
Reported in: II(1991)ACC482; 1991ACJ820; AIR1991Ker380
G.H. Guttal, J.1. The insurer, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Ernakulam has preferred this appeal against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode in M.A.C. No, 220 of 1981 by which a sum of Rs. 55,000/- was awarded to respondent Nos. 1 to 7, the heirs of deceased P. Kassim. The respondent No. 8, who is alleged to have been driving the vehicle at the time of the accident, disputes that he was driving the vehicle. The respondent No. 9, the insured, claims to have transferred the vehicle to respondent No. 8 before the occurrence of the accident. Therefore, he claims that he was not the owner of the vehicle at the relevant time. The respondents 1 to 7 are hereinafter referred to as the claimants,2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are briefly these: The deceased, P. Kassim, standing in front of a shop at Thottilpalam road junction, Kuttiadi, was knocked down by the jeep bearing Reg. No. KLR 7519, driven by the respondent No. 8. This was on 23-10-82 at about 2 p.m,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »