Kerala Court July 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.
The Quilon District Private Bus Operators Association, Kollam-1 Vs. th ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-30-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker267
ORDERK. Sreedharan, J. 1. An important question on the interpretation of Clause (4) of Section 71 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, hereinafter referred to as the Act arises for consideration. As per that clause a Regional Transport Authority shall not grant more than five stage carriage permits to any individual or more than ten stage carriage permits to any company, not being a State Transport Undertaking. Clause (5) of that section further states that in computing the number of permits to be granted under Sub-section (4), permits held by an applicant in the name of another person and the permits held by any company of which such applicant is Director shall also be taken into account. Clause (5) has got an explanation added to it. As per that explanation 'company' means any body corporate and includes a firm or other association of individuals. It further states that Director in relation to a firm means a partner in the firm. A plain reading of the above provisions makes it clear that ...
Avvammada Pathummabi and ors. Vs. Avvammada Sarommabi and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-27-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker56
K.P. Balanarayana Marar, J.1. These two appeals arise from the judgment and decree in O.S. 2/1976 Sub Court, Kavarathi in Lakshadweep. The suit is one for partition of 36 items of immovable properties, a boat and amount received by way of compensation for land acquired by Government. Some items are claimed by plaintiffs and defendants 1 to 19 and the remaining items by plaintiffs and defendants 1 to 22. Defendants 20 and 22 resisted the suit and contended that they belong to a different tarwad and claimed some of the plaint schedule properties as belonging to their tarwad. There was also dispute inter se between plaintiffs and defendants 1 to 19. Defendants 20 to 22 were found to be members of a different tarwad and the properties in their possession were found to be not available for partition. A preliminary decree was passed for division of the properties found available into 24 shares and for allotment of one share to plaintiffs. Other consequential reliefs were also granted. Aggrie...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Susheela P. Thampy
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-27-1991
Reported in: [1992]196ITR442(Ker)
K.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J. 1. The Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Thiruvananthapuram, is before us.2. The questions referred for our opinion read :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to claim exemption under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, if the answer to the above question is in the negative, the direction to the Wealth-tax Officer to grant the exemption is justified ?' 3. The assessee purchased a house property on June 7, 1971, at Bangalore for a total consideration of Rs. 1,12,730. In the declaration dated June 22, 1972, filed before the assessing authority, the assessee had stated that the property was purchased by her for the 'thavazhi' consisting of herself, her son, Dr. Mohan P. Thampy, and daughter, Smt. Thara K. Nair, However, by a letter dated January 1, 1973, the assessee had informed the Department that, as on the date of purchase, the assessee had with...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. G. Eroppino Giovanni and P. Bozzini
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-27-1991
Reported in: [1992]196ITR618(Ker)
K. P. Radhakrishna Menon, J.1. The assessment years we are concerned with are 1971-72, 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75. The two assesses involved in the assessment proceedings are individuals who are not citizens of India. They, at the relevant time, were the employees of one company in Italy by name ANSALDO. ANSALDO had entered into a collaboration agreement with the Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd., for short 'FACT', a Government of India undertaking incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, for the construction of an ammonia plant. During the pendency of this collaboration agreement, another Italian company by name Societa Italiana Impianti (hereinafter called 'SII') succeeded to the business and interest of ANSALDO. The assessees thereupon became the employees of SII and this succession to the business and interest of ANSALDO by SII was recognised by the FACT.2. As per Clause 3.19 of the agreement, SII shall make available at the plant site competent technicians and manufac...
Nazeema and ors. Vs. George Kuriakose and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-26-1991
Reported in: I(1992)ACC268; 1992ACJ816; AIR1992Ker67
Guttal, J. 1. In this appeal the claimants in M.A.C. No. 262 of 1983 impugn the legality of the award made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (M.A.C.T. for short), Kottayam, whereby the latter disallowed the claim for compensation of Rs.4 lakhs arising out of the death of Mohammed Basheer.2. The question which arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether the value of the share held by the deceased in a partnership business which was received by the claimants upon the death of the deceased, is liable to be deducted in assessing the amount of compensation under Section 110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939?The question arises out of the facts set out in paragraphs 3 and 4 below.3. The appellant No. 1 is the widow, and appellants Nos. 2 and 3 are the minor children of the deceased. The respondents Nos. 1 and 2 are respectively the owner and driver of the bus KLO 5871 which caused the death by rash and negligent driving. The respondent No. 3 is the insurer.4. On 4-5-1979 the dec...
Yohannan and anr. Vs. Harikrishnan Nair and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-25-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker49
P.K. Shamsuddin, J.1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree of the Sub Court, Trivandrum in O.S. No. 287 of 1985. The suit is for specific performance of an agreement for sale.2. Briefly stated the plaint averments are as follows : Defendants 1 and 2, who are the owners of plaint schedule property, agreed to sell the property to the plaintiffs for a consideration of Rs. 3,00,000/- and executed an agreement in their favour on 21-1-1985. An amount of Rs. 10,000/- was received by the defendants as advance. The sale was agreed to be complied within ten days. The agreement also provided that within the stipulated period building in the plaint schedule property should be demolished and the encumbrances on the property should be cleared off. The sale deed was got prepared by the plaintiff after purchasing necessary stamp paper on mutual consent. Plaintiffs and defendants sent to the Sub Registry Office to execute the sale deed but then the 3rd defendant came there and at his in...
Paul Mathews and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-25-1991
Reported in: (1991)98CTR(Ker)12; [1992]195ITR716(Ker)
K.A. Nayar, J.1. These income-tax reference cases arise out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, in I. T. A. Nos. 68 to 74/Cochin of 1982. We are concerned with the assessment years 1971-72 to 1976-77. The assessee is a partnership firm carrying on business as a transporting contractor. The firm was originally constituted by a deed dated March 28, 1966, with Sri Paul Mathew and Abraham Paul Mathew as partners. The firm was duly registered. Thereafter, it was reconstituted under a deed dated July 1, 1970, adding three more partners, viz., three other sons of Shri Paul Mathew. The new partners were Babu Paul Mathew, George Paul Mathew and Kuruvila Paul Mathew. On behalf of the firm, an application in Form No. 11A accompanied by a certified copy of the deed dated July 1, 1970, was submitted on March 31, 1971, and the Income-tax Officer granted registration to the firm for the assessment year 1971-72. The benefit of continuation of registration was granted for t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Palace Fund (individual)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-25-1991
Reported in: [1992]196ITR505(Ker)
K.A. Nayar, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following two questions which are identical for all the assessment years and arising out of the common order of the Appellate Tribunal dated July 20, 1981, for the assessment years 1967-68 to 1971-72 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the income from the properties cannot be assessed in the hands of the Palace Fund ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in finding that the members of the Royal Family have only some right of permissive use and occupation in the properties involved in the assessment and that the income from the properties cannot be assessed in the hands of the Palace Fund ?' 2. The assessee, the Palace Fund, was originally assessed in the status of a Hindu undivided family for the years 1964-65 to 1973-74. The notional in...
Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. K.A. Abdul Razack and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-25-1991
Reported in: (1991)97CTR(Ker)223; [1992]196ITR578(Ker)
K.A. Nayar, J. 1. The main question to be considered in the income-tax referred case and the original petitions is the same, and that is, when minors are admitted to the benefits of a partnership with contribution by the minors towards capital resulting in redistribution of capital in accordance with the profit-sharing proportion, whether there is a gift involved in the said reconstitution. In the income-tax referred case, we are concerned with the assessment year 1975-76. The assessee therein was a partner of the firm, Messrs. K. A. K. P. Kunhamoo and Co. On January 1, 1975, the assessee gifted Rs. 2,500 to each of his four minor sons. The return of gift for this transaction was filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1975-76 wherein the taxable gift shown was Rs. 5,000. Priorto January 1, 1974, the assessee's share in the partnership firm was 25 per cent. On January 1, 1974, the four minor sons of the assessee were admitted to the benefits of the partnership by a deed entered i...
M. Bhaskaran Pillai Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-24-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker86
Krishnamoorthy, J. 1. Petitioner in O. P. No. 3931 of 1985 is the appellant. 1.94 acres of land in Sy. No. 299/2A & B of Alwaye Village was acquired in 1952 under the Land Acquisition Act from the 4th respondent, for the purpose of National High-way. The National Highway was constructed in 1954 and only about 1 acre of land was utilised for the construction. Petitioner alleges that he is the owner of the eastern property and accordingly he applied for assignment of the unutilised land. Thereupon, out of the balance area available, under Ext. P 1 dated 10-7-1962 50 cents of land was given on kuthakapattom to the petitioner for a period of 12 years, with a condition that if Government required the land for any other purposes, it should be surrendered. While so, petitioner filed an application Ext. P8 dated 21-12-1979 before the Advisor to the then Governor for assignment of the land to him. In the meanwhile, the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar issued a notice Ext. P2 dated 31-12-1979 to surrend...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »