Kerala Court October 1998 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.
R. Natarajan Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam and ors ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Ker207
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The question that falls for consideration in this case is whether furnishing of particulars of a vehicle for stage carriage permit in the application form is a mandatory requirement and also whether the applicant need furnish the particulars before the actual grant of permit or before the issue of permit.2. A Full Bench of this Court in, Narayanan v. R.T.A. Trichur, 1980 KLT 249 : (AIR 1980 Ker 115) had occasion to consider the scope of Section 46 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, Rule 175 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules 1961 and statutory form prescribed under Rule 175(a) and Rule 186(2) of the Motor Vehicles Rules. Full Bench held that on a combined reading of those provisions it becomes clear that there is no mandatory obligation cast on an applicant for the grant of a stage carriage permit to furnish in his application the particulars of the vehicle proposed to be used by him for operating the service in the event of the permit being granted in his favour...
Joseph Michael and Bros. Ltd. Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer and ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-1998
Reported in: [1999]240ITR93(Ker)
P. Shanmugam, J.1. The petitioner is a transferee of agricultural property having purchased agricultural lands on November 30, 1977, from Randathara Estate and Anjarakandy Essential Oil Company. The agricultural income-tax assessment for the year 1975-76 in respect of the vendors was completed on March 9, 1981, fixing a total tax due at Rs. 16,027.24 (Rs. 4,006.91 on each partner).2. For the assessment year 1976-77, the assessment was made on March 25, 1982, fixing a tax effect of Rs. 70,448.18 and it was revised under Section 36 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act to Rs. 97,536.80. After recovering the tax due from the present owners the following amounts are pending to be realised from the petitioners :Assessment year and dateof orderRR No.Amount pendingRs.75-76/9-3-817/81-82 to 10/81-82/23-12-814,368.647C-77/25-3-826/82-83/25-11-8246,963.18Total51,331.823. Section 23 of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, deals with the assessment in case of transfer of right in land. The p...
Joseph Michael and Bros. Ltd. Vs. Agricultural Income Tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-1998
Reported in: (1999)153CTR(Ker)457
P. SHAAMGAM, J.:Petitioner is a transferee of agricultural property having purchased agricultural lands on 30th Nov., 1977 from M/s Randathara Estate and Anjarakandy Essential Oil Company. The agricultural income tax for the year 1975-76 in respect of the vendors was completed on 9th March, 1981, fixing a total tax due at Rs. 16,027/24 (Rs. 4,006/91 on each partner).2. For the asst. yr. 1976-77 the assessment was made on 25th March, 1982 fixing a tax effect of Rs. 70,448/18 and it was revised under s. 36 of the KGST Act of Rs. 97,536/80. After recovering the tax due from the present owners the following amounts are pending to be realised from the petitioners :Assessment year and date of orderRR No.Amount pending (Rs.)1975-76/9-3-19817/1981-82 to 10/1981-82 dt.23-12-19814,368.641976-77/25-3-19826/1982-83 dt. 25-11-198246,963.18Total51,331.82Sec. 23 of the Agrl. IT Act, 1950, deals with the assessment in case of transfer of right in land. The proviso to the said section enables the Depar...
T. Mohammed Vs. Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Ker116
ORDERK.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioner applied for grant of a regular permit to operate his vehicle on the route Guruvayur-Edappal. The route is an inter-district route traversing the districts of Malappuram and Thrissur. Major portion of the route lies within the jurisdiction of the Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram, which is the primary authority.2. Petitioner offered ready vehicle Kl. 10/D 1023 at the time of submitting his application and requested to grant regular permit, subject to counter signature from the Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur. Ext. P 1 is the application dated 18-8-1998 submitted by the petitioner along witha covering letter detailing the necessity of the service proposed, which was addressed to the second respondent. Petitioner then received Ext. P2 a copy of the communication sent by the Secretary, Regional Transport Authorily, Malappuram to the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur, requesting him to obtain and forward the concurrence ...
Rajesh Kumar B. Vs. Kerala Public Service Commission
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-1998
Reported in: (1999)ILLJ164Ker
Ar. Lakshmanan, J.1. Heard Mr. R. Krishna Raj for appellant and Mr. O.V. Radhakrishnan, standing counsel for the respondent.2. The above Writ Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated June 24, 1998 in O.P.9161/1998 of C.S. Rajan, J. a learned Judge of this Court dismissing the Original Petition on the ground that the appellant did not possess the required driving licence as on August 30, 1995, the last date of receipt of the application.3. The appellant filed the Original Petition to direct the Public Service Commission to consider his name for selection to the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector in the Motor Vehicles Department as notified in the Gazette dated July 18, 1995 and to quash Ext. P1 and to grant such other reliefs. According to the appellant he was issued with hall ticket and he attended the written examination. At the time of applying for the post he was having a Learner's Licence for Heavy Passenger Motor Vehicles and Heavy Goods Vehicles. But he obtained va...
Vincent Varghese Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-1998
Reported in: (1999)ILLJ1302Ker
K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J.1. The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P8 and seeking a declaration that he is entitled to be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits. He also seeks a direction for reinstatement. Exst. P8 is an order passed in an appeal filed by the petitioner against Ext.P6, whereby the petitioner was discharged from service on the reason that he had committed an offence involving moral turpitude. That order is confirmed by Ext.P8 dismissing the appeal of the petitioner. It is in the above circumstances that he has approached this Court.2. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner had been prosecuted for commission of offence under Section 498-A and that he had been convicted for imprisonment as well as for punishment of fine. That punishment was upheld by the appellate Court. In revision, this Court also upheld the conviction but he was given the benefit of Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Though the conviction was upheld,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›