Kerala Court July 1992 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.
Sivamani Alias Sivan and anr. Vs. State of Kerala Represented by C.i. ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-08-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ23
K.T. Thomas, J.1. Three masked burglars sneaked into a dwelling house at midnight, committed burglary and killed the house wife, stabbed her daughter-in-law and ran away with the booty. Police charge-sheeted three persons for the above, though only two of them could be nabbed since the third one who disappeared from the locality is still absconding. After trial, Sessions Judge convicted those two persons of burglary (S. 457,1.P.C.) and robbery (Section 394, I.P.C.) but acquitted them of murder. While awarding sentence the Sessions Judge did not take into account the limitation provided in Section 397 of the Penal Code regarding the minimum term and hence each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and five years respectively on the two counts.2. State of Kerala has filed one of the appeals challenging the order of acquittal of the offence of murder. The convicted persons filed the other appeal challenging the conviction and sentence. They will be referre...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. C.V. Joseph and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-07-1992
Reported in: 1993ACJ44
Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. This is an appeal by the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., the 3rd respondent in a claim petition under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The claim was filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein, the parents of one Francis, who was killed in an accident which took place near Ollur on 5.7.1980. Francis was aged 17 years at that time and was studying in the Tenth Standard. The claim was for an amount of Rs. 77,000/-. But the award was made only for Rs. 26,000/-. It is this award that is challenged in this appeal by the insurance company. The insurance company does not challenge the quantum of the award. Its contention is limited, namely, that the liability of the insurance company is only to the extent of Rs. 5,000/-, as per the terms of the policy covering the vehicle and, therefore, the award should have limited the liability of the appellant to Rs. 5,000/- leaving the balance to be paid by the owner of the vehicle, namely, the 3rd respondent herein.2. The app...
Kerala State Cashew Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of I ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-06-1992
Reported in: [1993]202ITR127(Ker)
1. The reference relates to the assessment year 1974-75. The question referred at the instance of the Revenue under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction under Section 35B(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of commission payments to Indian agents in India and sales expenditure on export sales incurred in India ?'2. There are two facets to the question, one relating to the commission payments to Indian agents in India and the other relating to the sales expenditure on export sales incurred in India. So far as the first aspect is concerned, the Tribunal had remitted the matter to the Income-tax Officer to consider the assessee's claim for weighted deduction under Section 35B(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the expenditure incurred in India also, if it is found that the expenditure had been incurred in connection with the export business of the ...
Robert Sebastian Vs. Linet Suba Also Known as Linet Suba Robert and an ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-02-1992
Reported in: AIR1992Ker412; II(1992)DMC345
Sreedharan, J. 1. This is a reference made by the District Court, Kollam, under Section 17 of the Indian Divorce Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. Court below, by order dated 4-7-1991, dissolved the marriage between the petitioner/husband and first respondent/wife. It also directed second respondent, the adulterer, to pay damages to the tune of Rs. 25,000/- to the petitioner. 2. Husband moved a petition under Sections 10 and 34 of the Act, alleging as follows:-- Marriage of the petitioner with the first respondent was solemnised on 9th July, 1981 at the Immaculate Conception Church, Pullichira. At the time of the marriage, petitioner was employed in Abudhabi. After 21 days of cohabitation, he returned to Abudhabi on 28th July, 1981. He returned on leave on 5th October, 1982 and stayed with the first respondent till 16th November, 1983. A male child was born through the wedlock on 25th July, 1983. Later he stayed with the first respondent from 28th March, 1984 to 2nd May, 1984....
Chrisostom Vs. Federal Bank Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-02-1992
Reported in: [1992(65)FLR695]; (1993)ILLJ422Ker
Balakrishnan, J.1. The appellant is the second defendant in O.S. 85/92 on the file of the Prl.Sub Court, Kochi. The respondent bank filed suit against the appellant and two others for realisation of amount due under a loan transaction. The first defendant in the suit was the principal debtor. The appellant herein was a surety to that transaction. The appellant was working in a private company. He retired from service on March 31, 1992. The appellant was entitled to receive certain pensionary benefits including gratuity. A sum of Rs. 30,000/- was due to the appellant as gratuity from the employer. The respondent-bank filed I.A. 776/92 under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure to restrain the appellant from receiving the retirement benefits from his employer. The appellant raised objection by contending that the pensionary benefits such as gratuity is not liable to be attached under Section 60(1)(g) of the Civil Procedure Code and therefore an injunction shall not be g...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›