Kerala Court July 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.
Plywood House Vs. Wood Craft Products Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-21-1993
Reported in: 1993(2)ALT(Cri)604; [1997]88CompCas565(Ker); 1994CriLJ543
K.T. Thomas, J. 1. The petitioner is a firm. On the strength of some cheques said to' have been issued by the petitioner-firm, two complaints have been filed against the managing partner of the firm for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act'). The first complaint was filed on November 23, 1991, and the other was filed on June 28, 1991. The managing partner of the firm, after entering appearance, raised a contention in the lower court that prosecution against him is not maintainable as the firm which drew the cheques was not made an accused in the complaints. On November 6, 1992, the complainant filed a petition in each case praying for impleading the firm as additional accused. Though the petitions were stoutly resisted, the Chief Judicial Magistrate before whom the complaints were filed, allowed the petitions by the impugned order.2. Two main contentions have been advanced by learned counsel for quashing the order. The first is that ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Chandrika Educational Trust
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-21-1993
Reported in: (1993)114CTR(Ker)212; [1994]207ITR108(Ker)
T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following four questions under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), in Income-tax References Nos. 472 to 474 of 1982, out of which two are at the instance of the Revenue and two at the instance of the assessee :At the instance of the Revenue (assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77): '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on an interpretation of Section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Income-tax Act and also in view of the finding that 'the property of the charitable trust had been used and applied for the benefit of persons referred to in Sub-section (3) of Section 13 during the relevant previous year' the assessee is entitled to exemption Assessment year 1975-76 : 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in view of the finding by the Tribunal, that 'the Commissioner of Income-tax considered that the order of the Income-tax Officer ...
K.M. Varghese and ors. Vs. K.M. Oommen and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-20-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Ker85
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. These appeals are against the judgment in letters of administration proceedings, converted as a suit O.S. No. 4 of 1990. The second plaintiff is the appellant in M.F.A. No. 631 of 1992 and plaintiffs 1, 3 and 4 are the appellants in M.F.A. No. 561 of 1992. In M.F.A. No. 631 of 1992, the appellant has arrayed plaintiffs Nos. 1, 3 and 4 as respondents. Similarly, in M.F.A. No. 561 of 1992, the second plaintiff is also a respondent. Both these appeals can be disposed of by a common judgment.2. The short facts necessary for thedisposal of these appeals are these :-- Plaintiffs and defendants are the children of Mathai and Rahelamma. They executed their last will and testament on 14-5-1979 and got the will registered on 15-5-1979 at Aranmula Sub Registry Office. The father died on 30-8-1984 and the mother on 19-1-1980. The testator, the father and the testatrix, the mother, had seven children -- six sons and one daughter. The third defendant is the only daughter. Def...
P.S. Jose Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-20-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ363
ORDERK.T. Thomas, J.1. A tragic fusion of two events snuffed the life of a young boy aged 15 in a trice on 3-9-1983. Drivers of two vehicles -- a car and a lorry -- were responsible for the tragedy and both were prosecuted in the same trial for rash or negligent driving. The driver of the car was acquitted. Aggrieved by the acquittal of the car driver and also the order by which lenient sentence was awarded to the lorry driver, deceased's father filed this revision. In the meanwhile, the lorry driver filed an appeal before the Sessions Court challenging the conviction and sentence passed on him.2. When the revision came up for arguments, it was felt that the appeal pending in the Sessions Court and this revision should be heard together and hence the appeal has been withdrawn to this Court. Arguments of counsel for all parties including the Additional Public Prosecutor were heard. Parties can be referred to as they are ranked in the revision.3. The events concatented into the tragedy a...
Jose Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-20-1993
Reported in: 1994ACJ544
K.T. Thomas, J. 1. A tragic fusion of two events snuffed the life of a young boy aged 15 in a trice on 3.9.1983. Drivers of two vehicles--a car and a lorry--were responsible for the tragedy and both were prosecuted in the same trial for rash or negligent driving. The driver of the car was acquitted. Aggrieved by the acquittal of the car driver and also the order by which lenient sentence was awarded to the lorry driver, deceased's father filed this revision. In the meanwhile, the lorry driver filed an appeal before the sessions court challenging the conviction and sentence passed on him.2. When the revision came up for arguments, it was felt that the appeal pending in the sessions court and this revision should be heard together and hence the appeal has been withdrawn to this court. Arguments of counsel for all parties including the Additional Public Prosecutor were heard. Parties can be referred to as they are ranked in the revision.3. The events concatenated into the tragedy are the ...
A.M. Zainalabdeen Musaliar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-15-1993
Reported in: [1994]207ITR143(Ker)
ORDER UNDER S. 144B--Breach of s. 144B.Held :Sec. 144B was only a procedural provision and a breach of that provision was not a fundamental or jurisdictional infirmity which could render the assessment void or a nullity.--Joseph Kuruvila v. CIT (1989) 179 ITR 139 (Ker) followed. Conclusion :Sec. 144B being procedural the breach thereof does not render the assessment void.Application :Not to current assessment years.Income Tax Act 1961 s.144B Reference--JURISDICTION OF HIGH COURT--Tribunal held in favour of capitalisation of interest on capital borrowed.Held :Power is vested in High Court to allow deduction thereof under s. 57(iii) instead. Application :Also to current assessment years.Citation :Income Tax Act 1961 s.256 T.L. Viswanatha Iyer, J. 1. The question referred to us, namely, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessment order was not a nullity and consequently in holding that the matter has to be restored to t...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. E.K. Mathew
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-13-1993
Reported in: (1993)113CTR(Ker)336; [1994]207ITR71(Ker)
P. Krishnamoorthy, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following three questions of law under Section 27 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to exemption of Rs. 1,50,000 under Section 5(1)(iva) of the Wealth-tax Act ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that in working out the interest of the partners in Messrs. E.K. Mathew and Bros., the entire liability to the Federal Bank has to be allowed against the net wealth of the firm in the computation under rule 2 of the Wealth-tax Rules ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that in evaluating the interest of the partners in Messrs. E. K. Mathew and Bros., and with particular reference to tea estate, the loan taken by the firm f...
Trinity Pharmaceuticals (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-t ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-13-1993
Reported in: [1994]206ITR431(Ker)
K.P. Balanarayana Marar, J.1. As directed by this court, the following three questions of law were referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, for a decision thereon.'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the light of the finding that the assessee had the liability to pay rent from August 11, 1972, and the rent of Rs. 4,000 is quite fair, the Tribunal was right in law in invoking the provisions of Section 40A(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to disallow part of the rent payments made for the period after August 11, 1972, at the rate of Rs. 4,000 per month? (2) Whether the Tribunal erred in law and acted beyond the jurisdiction vested in it under Section 254(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in deciding and declaring the allowable deduction on account of rent for the period even beyond March 31, 1974 ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and under Section 30 of the Income-tax Act, the Tribunal is right in allowi...
P.N. Sivarajan Vs. State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-13-1993
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ1056Ker
K.S. Paripoornan, J.1. The petitioner in O.P.No. 9800 of 1989 is the appellant herein. The respondents herein are the respondents in the original petition-State of Kerala and the Director of Scheduled Castes Development Department. The petitioner entered service as Lower Division Clerk in the Harijan Welfare Department on September 23, 1957. He retired from service on superannuation in 1984. His main complaint is that his legitimate promotion was withheld and was not given. For no fault of the petitioner, he was not actually promoted on the due dates and was prevented from working in a post which he was entitled. In other words, the petitioner was unreasonably and illegally denied the legitimate promotions, and was prevented from working in higher posts.2. The original petition was filed to quash Exts. P5 and P6 (a)-proceedings of the Government dated June 24, 1987 and proceedings of the Director of Scheduled Caste Development Department dated June 22, 1988. There was also a prayer for...
Arief Trading Co. Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-13-1993
Reported in: II(1994)ACC199
G. Rajasekharan, J.1. Three Suits, O.S. 272/84, 269/84 and 275/84 on the file of the Sub Court, Kozhikode, were tried jointly and disposed of by a common judgment. A.S. Nos. 5/90, 11/90 and 12/90 arise from the above Suits respectively.2. Plaintiff in the Suits in the United India Insurance Company, represented by the Divisional Manager. Defendants 1 & 2 represent the Carrier, and third defendant is the consignor of the goods through the Carrier.3. O.S. 272/84 relates to the consignment of 50 bags of black pepper valued at Rs. 35,600/-, to be transported to M/s. G.S. Traders, Delhi through the Carriers, Economic Transport Organisation, Beach Road, Kozhikode. O.S. 269/84 is with respect to another consignment of 50 bags of black pepper which is valued at Rs. 37,200/-. The consignment in connection with O.S. 275/84 was also of 50 bags of pepper which was valued at Rs. 32,100/-. All these consignments were insured with the plaintiff-Insurance Company. The goods were to be delivered throug...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »