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.
K.K. Thilakan and ors. Vs. Fact Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-24-1991
Reported in: (1992)IILLJ782Ker
Sreedharan, J.1. Petitioners, 26 in number, were workers employed by contractor, Pigee Agencies. They were engaged, according to them, as workmen in connection with the manufacturing process of super phosphate in the Udyogamandal Division of the first respondent concern. They are, it is alleged, having continuous and uninterrupted service for more than ten years. On March 24, 1984, they were denied employment at the instance of Pigee Agencies. Thereupon an industrial dispute was raised regarding their absorption in the establishment of the first respondent. Government referred the issue for adjudication to the Labour Court, Brnakulam. After a detailed enquiry, Labour Court passed Exihibit P-1 award dated March 24, 1984. As per that award, the first respondent was directed to reinstate 32 workmen with continuity of service and benefit of arrears in back wages. That award was challenged by the first respondent before this Court in Original Petition No. 9986 of 1984. Learned Single Judge ...
State of Kerala and anr. Vs. K. Kurian P. Paul
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-17-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker180
G.H. Guttal, J.1. This appeal by the State of Kerala is against the order dt. 14-8-1986 made in O.P. (ARB) No. 332/85 by the Principal Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram. By the impugned order, the learned trial Judge (a) dismissed the appellant's petition No. 332/85 for setting aside the award in favour of the respondent Contractor and (b) made a decree in terms of the award of the Arbitrator which granted to the respondent a sum of Rs. 3,64,986.00 under various claims made by him.2. The appellant awarded to the respondent contract for the construction of KIP --RBC formation of Sasthamkotta branch canal. Under this contract dt. 26-2-1982, the work was to be completed within 12 months from 17-4-1982. Certian differences arose between the parties. The disputes in the terms of claims made by the respondent were referred to the arbitration of Gopinathan Nair, retired Chief Engineer, P.W.D. The appointment of the Arbitrator was made in accordance with Clause 52 of the contract styled as 'local ...
E.S.i. Corporation Vs. Leela Karunakaran
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-16-1991
Reported in: (1994)IIILLJ640Ker
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. The question raised in this appeal is as to the nature of subsistence allowance given to a suspended employee. Appellant submits that the subsistence allowance is also wages within the definition of Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act. Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act reads thus:-''Wages' means all remuneration paid or payable in cash to an employee, if the terms of the contract of employment, express or implied, were fulfilled and includes any payment to an employee in respect of any period of authorised leave, lock-out, strike which is not illegal or lay-off and other additional remuneration, if any, paid at intervals not exceeding two months but does not include- (a) any contribution paid by the employer to any pension fund or provident fund, or under this Act; (b) any travelling allowance or the value of any travelling concession; (c) any sum paid to the person employed to defray special expenses entailed on him by the natu...
State of Kerala Vs. Narayanan Bhaskaran and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-16-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ238
Chettur Sankaran Nair, J.1. This appeal by leave, is directed against the order of acquittal in S.C. 10/86 on the file of the Court of Session, Pathanamthitta Division. Respondents were charged with offences punishable under Sections 342, 324 and 302 read with Section 34, IPC, in that they in furtherance of their common intention, caused the death of one Muhammed Kannu and caused injuries to PW 2, at or about 9 p.m. on 5-6-1985. The incident took place in front of the shop of PW 3, at Mundukottakkal. According to prosecution, respondents were talking among themselves, when the deceased came on the scene. When deceased went near the respondents-accused, first respondent is alleged to have taken a chopper (M.O. 5), which the fourth respondent was carrying, and inflicted injuries on the deceased. PW 2 pleaded with them not to kill the deceased, and went towards them. Upon that, first accused is said to have inflicted a wound on his arm with the chopper. Thereafter, respondents went southw...
Thanka Vs. Chinnappa Gounder and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-15-1991
Reported in: I(1993)ACC205
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. Claimant in a motor accident claim petition is the appellant. Claimant was injured in the accident. It happened on 22.3.1984. Appellant was returning to her house after taking water in a pot from the public pipe which is on the southern side of the road. A motor cycle which was driven by the 2nd respondent hit the appellant. The impact of the hit caused serious injuries on the body of the appellant. Her right thigh bone was broken. She was taken to the Government Hospital, Palghat. She was in the hospital for 39 days. Plaster was put on her leg. After two months, plaster was removed and finding that the bones were not united, again her leg was plastered. On that occasion, she was an inpatient for 8 days. Subsequently, plaster was removed. But she was not able to walk properly and she was not able to bend her knee without pain.2. The Tribunal found that the injury was caused on account of the negligent driving of the motor cycle by the 2nd respondent. The appella...
R. Kothandarama Naidu Vs. Carona Sahu Co. Ltd., Bombay and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-12-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ker95
ORDERK.A. Nayar, J. 1. In this Original Petition, an agriculturist having two children, both married and living in the same house along with their father, is the petitioner/landlord. He filed a petition under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (for short 'the Act') to evict the first respondent tenant which is a company having business all over India. The petition was filed on the ground that the building is bona fide required for his own occupation or for the occupation of his dependent children. The Rent Control Court held that the sons are dependent on the petitioner, that they have necessary means to start the business, that the business which the petitioner wanted to start in the building was stationery business and that the schedule building is the only shop building owned by the petitioner in Palghat Municipality. But, as the petitioner is an agriculturist and as the particulars of the amount proposed to be invested was not mentioned in the applic...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S. Murugappa Chettiar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-12-1991
Reported in: (1991)97CTR(Ker)153; [1992]197ITR575(Ker)
K.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J.1. The Revenue is before us. The questions referred for our opinion read :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee is the owner of the assets of Sree Muruga Tile Works, Pudukkad, and not the partnership firm ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in allowing depreciation in respect of the assets of Sree Muruga Tile Works, Pudukkad, in the hands of the assessee as claimed by him for the two assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77?'2. Facts relevant for the disposal of the case can briefly be stated thus : The years of assessment are 1975-76 and 1976-77. Till the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1972-73, the assessee was the proprietor of the business, Sree Muruga Tile Works, Chittur. While so, the assessee took his son in the business as a partner. Thus, from the assessment year 1973-74 onwards, the business was ru...
State of Kerala Vs. Mani Alias Chandran
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-12-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1682
K.T. Thomas, J.1. Mother-in-law of the appellant died due to drowning. Her dead-body was recovered from a stream flowing near her residence. Appellant is alleged to have pushed her into the stream to finish her off. As the trial Court exonerated him for want of evidence, State of Kerala has filed this appeal. Suo motu revisional proceedings have also been initiated by the High Court against the order of acquittal.2. Story of the prosecution is this: The stream Mangattu Puzha (in Wayanad District) was on spate during monsoon in June, 1986 and water was flowing turbulently. Atmosphere in deceased's house was no less turbulent as the appellant was torturing his wife Ponnamma (P.W. 5) physically and mentally despite her pregnancy in advanced stage. Their's was not a negotiated marriage. Appellant was forced to marry her when she became pregnant through him. After marriage, the couple were staying with the parent of P.W. 5. Appellant used to come home in sozzled condition and flog his wife....
United Coir Works Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-11-1991
Reported in: (1991)97CTR(Ker)83; [1992]195ITR463(Ker)
K.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J. 1. The assessee is before us. It is a registered firm having the name, the United Coir Works. The assessee filed two returns of income, one for the period from August 17, 1974, to April 15, 1975, and the other for the period from April 16, 1975, to August 16, 1975, both relating to the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1976-77. To a query of the assessing authority as to why two returns were filed, the assessee gave the explanation which, briefly stated, is this : During the period from August 17, 1974, to April 15, 1975, the business was carried on by a registered firm with the partners C.V. Mathew, C.M. George and C.M. Mathew. This business was sold to a new firm with the partners C.V. Mathew, C.M. George, C.M. Mathew and P.I. Alexander, constituted on April 16, 1975. The two firms which carried on the business during the periods aforesaid are two distinct and different legal entities. The firm which came into being prior to April 16, 1975, sol...
Thanka Vs. Chinnappa Gounder and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-11-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ669
Varghese Kailiath, J.1. Claimant in a motor accident claim petition is the appellant. Claimant was injured in the accident. It happened on 22.3.1984. Appellant was returning to her house after taking water in a pot from the public pipe which is on the southern side of the road A motor cycle which was driven by the 2nd respondent hit the appellant. The impact of the hit caused serious injuries on the body of the appellant. Her right thigh bone was broken. She was taken to the Government Hospital, Palghat. She was in the hospital for 39 days. Plaster was put on her leg. After two months, plaster was removed and finding that the bones were not united, again her leg was plastered. On that occasion, she was an inpatient for 8 days. Subsequently, plaster was removed. But she was not able to walk properly and she was not able to bend her knee without pain.2. The Tribunal found that the injury was caused on account of the negligent driving of the motor cycle by the 2nd respondent. The appellan...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »