Kerala Court March 1993 Judgments
Executive Engineer, Attappady Valley Irrigation Project, Agali and ors ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-31-1993
Reported in: AIR1993Ker320
Jagannadha Rao, C.J. 1. These two writ appeals are connected and can be disposed of together. W.A. 1045 of 1991 is filed by the State of Kerala, the Chief Conservator of Forests and the Executive Engineer, Attappady Valley Irrigation Project, Agali P.O., Mannarkad. They were respectively respondents 3,4 and 1 in the writ petition. In W.A. 25 of 1993, appellant is Sri O. Elamkovan, a contractor, who was the successful bidder for cutting the bamboo clusters. The contesting respondent in both the appeals is the writ petitioner, called the 'Environmental and Ecological Protection Samithy', Agali, represented by its Convener, one K. Rajan. 2. The relief claimed by the respondent-writ petitioner in the writ petition is for the issue of a writ of prohibition, prohibiting the appellants (in particular the appellant in W.A. 25 of 1993, who is the contractor) from cutting the spread bamboo reed forest in Attappady area, allegedly 4 kilometres long. The writ petition was filed on 17-11-1989. 3. T...
Tag this Judgment!K. Nandakumar Vs. Income-tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-29-1993
Reported in: [1993]204ITR856(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J. 1. The two petitioners in these original petitions have been assessed to tax under the Income-tax Act, 1961, ('the Act'). They were in receipt of the income from two firms, Messrs. Thirumani Publications (Trust) and Messrs. United Film Exhibitors. Both of them had also income by way of interest on fixed deposits and savings accounts in banks. The petitioners had taken loans from the Indian Bank for the purposes of contributing their portion of the share capital in the firm, Messrs. United Film Exhibitors. Both the petitioners had filed returns claiming deduction of Rs. 6,000 under Section 80L of the Act in respect of their interest from deposits in the bank. The assessments were completed for the year 1983-84 by exhibit P-2 orders without granting the benefit. On enquiry they knew that they were not granted the benefit for the reason that they had to pay interest to the bank on the loans on the fixed deposits and, therefore, there was no scope for granting the ...
Tag this Judgment!V. Rajasekharan Nair Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-29-1993
Reported in: [1993]204ITR783(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. The petitioner is an assessee to income-tax on the files of the second respondent against whom a prosecution exhibit P-7, namely, C. C. No. 63 of 1987, on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Ernakulam, has been launched. The allegation is of commission of offences under Sections 276C(1) and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case is pending.2. The assessment year concerned is 1977-78. Alleging that the petitioner had not correctly posted all his receipts in the account books, an amount of Rs. 5,50,000 was added to the income returned. Details thereof are given in exhibit P-7. There was also an addition of Rs. 58,443.93 on account of alleged sales of rationed articles, which, according to the assessing authority, had not been effected by the petitioner on the dates mentioned. The order of assessment was followed by levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which was taken in appeal before the Income-tax Appella...
Tag this Judgment!Keepattel Bappu alias Moidunni and Ors. Vs. Mugharikutty's son Kizhakk ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-26-1993
Reported in: AIR1993Ker273
Varghese Kalliath, J. 1. This casewas referred to a Full Bench along withS.A. 364/81 by a Division Bench of thisCourt. The Division Bench thought that thedecision in Parameswaran Thampi v. Podi-van Thomas, 1984 Ker LT 397 : (AIR 1984Ker 135), required reconsideration by a FullBench. The Full Bench, after hearingS.A. 364/81 in extenso, was of the opinionthat S.A. 364/81 can be disposed of withoutdeciding the correctness of the question of lispendens decided in Parameswaran Thampi'scase. In considering S.A. 472/81 the FullBench observed that since the Full Bench hasdecided not to reconsider the questiondecided in Parameswaran Thampi's case sincethat question was not arising for the disposalof the case, S.A. 364/81, there is no necessityto dispose of this appeal (S.A. 472/81) by theFull Bench. It is observed in the order of theFull Bench that the respondent in this appealcontended that the question of lis pendensdoes not arise in this case and therefore thatquestion need not be decided in...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Customs Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-26-1993
Reported in: 1993LC383(Kerala); 1993(66)ELT351(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. The question for consideration in this case is whether the petitioner, the Collector of Customs Kochi is liable to pay sales tax under the Kerala General Sales-tax Act, 1963 (the KGST Act) in respect of the sales of confiscated and unclaimed goods. The Government of Kerala informed the petitioner of his liability by the letter Ext. P1 dated May 12,1988 and that led to this writ petition.2. Petitioner is the Collector of Customs, Kochi who is discharging statutory duties and functions under the Customs Act, 1962. In the course of those duties and function, he comes into possession of goods which are either confiscated ones or those remaining unclaimed. The provisions for confiscation of goods are contained in Chapter XIV of the Customs Act, and Section 126 provides that when any goods are confiscated under the said Act, such goods shall thereupon vest in the Central Government. It is these goods which are confiscated, and goods which come into the possession o...
Tag this Judgment!K.J. Luka Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-25-1993
Reported in: (1994)ILLJ1244Ker
ORDERP.K. Shamsuddin, J.1. The petitioner in O.P. 6619/89 was a Workshop Foreman and that post comes under Kerala Technical Education Subordinate Service. Thereafter, the petitioner was appointed by transfer to the category of Workshop Superintendent of the Polytechnic which is the post falling under the Kerala Technical Education Service. By Ext. P-1 proceedings, the provisional appointment of the petitioner was regularised with effect from September 2,1967. The scale of pay of Workshop Superintendent in Polytechnic is Rs. 750-1450 (pre-revised) and the pay of the petitioner was fixed in the minimum of the scale on Rs. 750-1450. In the final gradation list as on December 31, 1979 published in the Kerala Gazette No. 45 dated November 13, 1984, the petitioner was assigned rank No. 6. Serial numbers 3,4 and 5 in that list are direct recruits.2. Govt. issued Ext. P-3 G.O. (MS) No. 439/79/FAD dated August 1, 1979 allowing the benefit of a Higher Grade with effect from April 1, 1979 to all ...
Tag this Judgment!Premier Tyres Ltd. Vs. General Secretary, Premier Tyres Workers' Assn. ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-23-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR1043]; (1994)ILLJ1084Ker
ORDERM.M. Pareed Pillay, J.1. The challenge is against Ext. P-4 award of the second respondent. Petitioner is a public limited company. First respondent-Union raised a claim on the ground that there is disparity in wages between 9 workers who are working as Quality Control Assistants and three others appointed for the same post on the same date. Petitioner contended that the salary is paid according to the provisions of the conciliation settlement which is binding on the management as well as the workers. The State Government referred the dispute for adjudication to the second respondent. The Tribunal passed Ext. P-4 award upholding the discrimination charge against the petitioner (hereafter referred to as 'the management') and directed payment of the deducted amount to the aggrieved workmen with retrospective effect from the date on which they were appointed as Quality Control Assistants.2. Contention of the petitioner is that conditions of service, wages and other emoluments were fix...
Tag this Judgment!Chela Beedi Workers Industrial Co-op. Society Ltd. Vs. K.K. Bharathan ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-22-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR1231]; (1994)IILLJ396Ker
P.K. Shamsuddin, J. 1. In this original petition the petitioner challenges Exhibit P-9 award passed by the Labour Court, Calicut 2. The petitioner is a co-operative society registered under the Co- operative Societies Act. The members of the society are workmen and the society is administered by an elected managing committee as provided under the bye-laws and provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act.3. The petitioner is engaged in manufacturing beedies which are marketed through the central society under the trade mark 'Dinesh Beedi'. The central society is also a cooperative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act under the name and style 'Kerala Dinesh Beedi Workers Central Co-operative Society'. The members of the Dinesh Beedi Society are primary co-operative societies like the petitioner-society. The first respondent was a beedi roller engaged in the Chala Branch of the society. On October 12, 1983, the first respondent submitted Exhibit P-2 application for leav...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. A.S. Guna Shenoy
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-18-1993
Reported in: [1993]204ITR597(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. Identical questions arise for consideration in these two original petitions. The Revenue is the petitioner in both the cases. The matter arises under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. Original Petition No. 10886 of 1989 is concerned with the assessment year 1979-80 and Original Petition No. 10888 of 1989 deals with the assessment year 1981-82. The controversy in these cases is in a narrow compass. It centres round the procedure adopted by the Appellate Tribunal in delivering its orders in the appeals. It is seen that the Accountant Member and the Judicial Member passed a common order dated August 31, 1987. The Accountant Member, after subscribing his signature to the common order, has written a separate concurring order on the same date. The question is whether the Accountant Member, having subscribed his signature to the common order, was justified in law in writing a separate order, and its impact in the disposal of the appeal. According to the Revenue, having subscrib...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. P.P. Khader Haji
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-18-1993
Reported in: [1993]204ITR703(Ker)
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. The Revenue is the petitioner herein. The respondent is an assessee to income-tax. We are concerned with the assessment year 1982-83, for which the accounting period ended on March 31, 1982. In this original petition, the Revenue prays for a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, to refer the following two questions of law for the decision of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, (a) the Tribunal is justified in cancelling the assessment ? (b) the Tribunal is right in deleting the addition without further enquiry ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal should not have remitted the case to the officer for a de novo consideration ?'2. For the assessment year 1982-83, the assessee did not file a return. Notice under Section 148 was issued on April 20, 1983, and served on the assessee on May 4, 1983. There was no appearance on behalf of the assessee. Further notices wer...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »