Kerala Court May 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.
C.J. Thomas and anr. Vs. Labour Court and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-30-1991
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ278Ker
K.A. Nayar, J.1. This original petition is to quash Exhibit P-6 order of the Labour Court, Quilon. The petitioners who raised dispute regarding denial of employment to them by the third respondent, got an award in their favour in I.D. No. 1 of 1986 by which the third respondent-management was directed to reinstate the petitioners in service with back-wages and other benefits due to them as if they had continued in service. That award was passed by the Labour Court on July 19, 1986 and it was published in the Kerala Gazette dated November 25, 1986. The petitioners have produced the same as Exhibit P-l. The issue referred there was denial of employment to C.J. Thomas and N.K. Kuttappan from March, 1981. In the award it is stated that the management did not enter appearance even after accepting the notice and it was declared ex parte. It was thereafter, examining the petitioners as WWs-1 and 2, that the award was passed directing the management to reinstate the petitioners in service with...
Mount Senai Hospital Vs. Income-tax Officer and Another.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-29-1991
Reported in: [1992]193ITR772(Ker)
K. A. NAYAR, J. - The original petition is to quash the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kochi, passed under section 264 of the Income-tax Act refusing to revise the assessment order for the year 1985-86. Admittedly, the assessment order for 1985-86 has been the subject-matter of an appeal before the appellate authority and the appellate order has become final. Assessment order for the year 1985-86 was sought to be revised under section 264 and the Commissioner rejected the application on the ground that an application to revise the order under section 264 cannot lie as section 264(4)(c) clearly provides that the Commissioner shall not revise any order under section 264 if the order has been made the subject-matter of an appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). In this case, there is no dispute that the order has been made the subject of an appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Hence, I find no irregularity or illegality or illegality in the order sough...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. K.R. Vijayarajan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-27-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ663
Varghese Kalliath, J. 1. This is an appeal against the award in M.A.C. No. 250 of 1982 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode. Appellants before us are the owner of a tempo van which caused injury to the petitioner in M.A.C. No. 250 of 1982 and the insurer. They were the 1st and 3rd respondents before the Tribunal. The 2nd respondent was the driver of the tempo van.2. Two questions arise for consideration in this appeal. The first question is as to whether the driver of the tempo van was negligent and that caused the accident. The second question is whether the amount of compensation awarded is justifiable in the circumstances of the case.3. The unfortunate event happened on 19.7.1982 at about 8 o'clock in the morning. It happened in Beach Road, Calicut. The 2nd appellant is the owner of the tempo van. It was insured with the 1st appellant. The tempo van was driven by the 2nd respondent before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The injured petitioner before the...
Karvalves Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-03-1991
Reported in: (1991)99CTR(Ker)234; [1992]197ITR95(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. These two references are connected cases. The parties in both the cases are the same. Income-tax Reference No. 72 of 1987 is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (in short, 'the Tribunal'), at the instance of an assessee, who was the appellant before it in I. T. A. No. 318/(Coch.) of 1983. Income-tax Reference No. 117 of 1987 is a reference made by the Tribunal at the instance of the Revenue which was the appellant before it in I. T. A. No. 360/ (Coch.) of 1983. Income-tax Application No. 318/(Coch.) of 1983 and I. T. A. No. 360/(Coch.) of 1983, both related to the assessment year 1971-72 of the same assessee and were heard together and disposed of by a common judgment by the Tribunal on January 31, 1986. The assessee as well as the Revenue filed R. A. No. 125/(Coch.) of 1986 and R. A. No. 131/(Coch.) of 1986, respectively, praying that the Tribunal may be pleased to refer certain questions of law, specified in the respective reference applicatio...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bhageeratha Engineering Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-03-1991
Reported in: (1992)99CTR(Ker)204; [1992]193ITR674(Ker)
K. S. PARIPOORNAN J. - At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') has referred the following question of law for the decision of this court in the above two cases :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to investment allowance under section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'The respondent is a company engaged in the business of undertaking building contracts. We are concerned with the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82, the previous years ending on March 31, 1980, and March 31, 1981, respectively. In the previous years relating to the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82, the assessee had acquired plant and machinery and claimed investment allowance of Rs. 29,67,024 and Rs. 11,44,835, respectively, under section 32A of the Income-tax Act. The Income-tax Officer denied the relief. The grounds for denial of the relief were two-fold : (1) the machinery had not been installed in an 'industri...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›