Kerala Court November 1993 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.
Nithirithil Sherly Vs. Mrs. C.M. Chandramathi and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-1993
Reported in: 1(1996)ACC473
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. Appellant was the claimant in an application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 in respect of an accident which took place on 31.5.1981 while she was traveling as a passenger in the bus KRV 3155 belonging to the first respondent and driven by the third respondent and insured with the second respondent. This bus had a brush with a luxury coach KRT 1297 in which the appellant who was then aged 13 years and a school going girl lost the tip of her index finger on the right hand. She filed the claim for Rs. 75,000/-, claiming Rs. 15,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs. 25,000/- for permanent disability, Rs. 30,000/- for loss of earnings due to loss of studies and Rs. 5000/- for transportation and bystander and others. The other vehicle KRT 1297 was owned by the 4th respondent, driven by the 5th respondent and insured with the 6th respondent. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 2,425/- with interest thereon at 6% per annum from the date o...
K. M. Mohammed Kutty Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and O ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-11-1993
Reported in: [1994]209ITR686(Ker)
ASSESSMENT--Setting aside in writ proceedings.Held :(i) So long as a best judgment assessment cannot be found to be arbitrarily made, the High Court cannot interfere with it in writ proceedings. (ii) The petitioner could not show that the estimate of income was not in accordance with law. The data furnished by the petitioner for the years 1978-79 to 1982-83 had been considered. The orders of assessment for the asst. yrs. 1982-83 and 1983-84 were valid and could not be quashed.Conclusion :Best judgment assessment cannot be set aside in writ proceedings provided made after considering data furnished by assessee.Application :Also applicable to the cases under the IT Act, 1961.Kerala Agrl ITA 1950 s.17(4)Constitution of India art 226 ...
Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax Vs. Mount ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-11-1993
Reported in: (1994)117CTR(Ker)166; [1994]208ITR86(Ker)
K. S. PARIPOORNAN J. - At the instance of an assessee, the Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax, Quilon, by order dated April 17, 1989, has referred the following two questions of law for the decision of this court under section 60(3) of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950 :'(a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the application for registration submitted by the assessee before the assessing authority after the original assessment orders were set aside in revision by the Deputy Commissioner and assessments were to be made afresh by the assessing authority were proper ?(b) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, when the assessing authority had already treated the assessee as registered firm and continued the registration and made assessments on that basis and such orders the assessments were subsequently set aside by the Commissioner in revision under section 34, can the assessee be denied and deprived of the...
V. Kumaran Erady Vs. General Manager, Madras Telephones, Dept. of Tale ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-09-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Ker118
ORDERK. Narayana Kurup, J.1. The petitioner who is thesubscriber of telephone No. 613326 Madrasprays for the issuance of a writ of certiorari toquash Exts. P5, P7 series, P9, P11, P11(b) andP11(c) and for the issuance of a writ ofmandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 toreconnect the petitioner's telephone No.613326 and for other incidental reliefs. Thefacts of the case are as follows :2. The petitioner's telephone No. 613326 was installed at his residence 2A, Temple Rock, No. 44, New Avadi Road, Madras. Since he shifted his residence from Madras, he made Ext. P1 application to the second respondent for keeping the telephone under safe custody with effect from 30-11-1988. Ext. P1 was followed by Exts. P2 and P3 reminders addressed by the petitioner to the second respondent to confirm action has been taken pursuant to Ext. P1. Ext. P4 is yet another representation submitted by the petitioner to the second respondent requesting him to confirm that his telephone has been kept under lon...
Beeravu Vs. K.K. Damodaran and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-05-1993
Reported in: II(1994)ACC417; 1994ACJ1297
K. John Mathew J.1. The claimant is the appellant. On 18.4.1986 while he was travelling in a bus belonging to the 1st respondent and driven by the 2nd respondent, the bus hit against an electric post which resulted in seven injuries to the petitioner. According to the claimant, the accident happened due to the rash and negligent driving of the 2nd respondent, viz., the driver. He claimed a compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- and limited to Rs. 1,00,000/-. The 3rd respondent is the insurer of the vehicle.2. The Tribunal after considering the evidence fixed the total compensation of Rs. 67,980/-. However, holding that the claimant was also negligent, his negligence was estimated at 50 per cent and awarded only one-half of the amount, namely, Rs. 33,990/-. This appeal is filed by the claimant.3. On going through the evidence we are of the view that the compensation amount fixed by the Tribunal is quite fair and reasonable. The claimant had a fracture on the lower left hand and crush injury on ...
V. Abusali Vs. the Commandant and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-04-1993
Reported in: (1995)ILLJ547Ker
Jagannadha Rao, C.J.1. These two writ appeals arise out of the same judgment in Writ Petition, O.P. No. 107 of 1991. W.A. No. 811 of 1993 is filed by the writ petitioner Sri, Abusali, while W.A. No. 780 of 1993 is filed by the Commandant CISF, FACT (CD), who was the first respondent in the writ petition.2. The grievance in the writ petition was in regard to an order of punishment of removing the writ petitioner from service. Ext. P4 is the said order dated May 31, 1990 issued by the Commandant. The writ petitioner contended before the learned Single Judge that the Enquiry Officer in this case was a subordinate officer under the defacto complainant, and therefore the whole proceedings were vitiated. In fact, the complaint was made against the writ petitioner by the Assistant Commandant, and the person appointed to inquire into the matter was an Inspector working under the Assistant Commandant. The Enquiry Officer found that charge No. 1 was established in part and Charge No. 2 in full. ...
Cappellotto Livio Vs. Indian Council of Social Welfare
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-02-1993
Reported in: I(1994)DMC564
K. John Mathew, J.1. These are appeals filed under Section 47(d) of the Guardians and Wards Act, VIII of 3890, against separate orders of the District Judge, Kottayam in O.P. (G & W) Nos. 173/93, 174/93, 172/93 and 175/93 respectively. Those petitions were filed by the respective petitioners therein for appointing them as guardians of four minors, with permission to take them out of India for adoption. The learned District Judge has stated the facts in detail in the judgments under appeal. It is not necessary to refer to the facts in this judgment since the petitions were dismissed only on one ground. Learned District Judge held that the 2nd respondent did not take every effort to secure or to find out members of Indian Families for being appointed as the guardians of the minors, On this ground these petitions were dismissed.2. Although the petitioners are different and the minors in respect of whom the petitions are filed in different, we are disposing of these appeals by this common ...
S. Valsala Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-01-1993
Reported in: [1994]95STC450(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. This revision is filed by an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. In this revision, she assails the order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kottayam, dated March 27, 1992 in T.A. No. 266 of 1991. The respondent is the State. The assessee is a dealer in arrack. We are concerned with the assessment year 1987-88. During the year, the officials of the Sales Tax Department inspected the business place of the assessee on September 24, 1987 and January 16, 1988. During the first inspection on September 24, 1987, there was an excess of 32 bags of empty bottles. During the second inspection on January 16, 1988, apart from stock discrepancy, the officials recovered a diary showing daily cash transactions, day book in loose sheets from January 1, 1988 to January 15, 1988, arrack issued statement from April 3, 1987 to October 9, 1987 and purchase bills for 1987-88. On verification of the said records with the accounts maintained by the...