Kerala Court November 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.
Sunil Vs. Director General of Meteorology
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-1998
Reported in: (1999)IILLJ412Ker
K. Narayana Kurup, J.1. The petitioner was appointed and posted originally on December 28, 1992 as Senior Observer in the Indian Meteorological Department at Adirampattinam, Tamil Nadu. He is a native of Calicut. Since his father is a heart patient and since there is nobody to look after him, the petitioner made a request to the 2nd respondent for transfer to Calicut on July 29, 1993. His first request was followed by further requests dated March 29, 1995 and April 4, 1995. However, the 2nd respondent as per order dated August 22, 1995 instead of transferring the petitioner to Calicut transferred him from Adirampattinam, Tamil Nadu to Trivandrum. The petitioner joined duty at Trivandrum consequent on the transfer. Even after joining at Trivandrum, the petitioner made several requests to the 2nd respondent of the petitioner for a transfer to Calicut. Since the request of the petitioner for a transfer to Calicut was not considered by the 2nd respondent inspite of existence of two vacanci...
Arakkan Narayanan Vs. Indian Handloom Traders and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-18-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Ker279
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 18 of 1989 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Tellicherry. The plaintiff is the appellant. The plaintiff is the proprietor of Wardha Textiles, Chirackal, Cannanore. The first defendant is M/s. Indian Handloom Traders. According to the plaintiff he has been dealing in textile goods in Cannanore. The defendants are textile agents and their centre of activities is mainly in New Delhi. The defendants used to book orders. As per those orders, goods were delivered to the defendants. According to the plaintiff, goods were delivered to the defendants between 5-11-1985 and 16-9-1987. The plaintiff has been keeping an account of the amount due from the defendants as well as the amount received from the defendants. The case of the plaintiff is that as on 20-1-1988, there is a balance of Rs. 86,271/- due from the first defendant. On 30-10-1987, the first defendant issued a cheque for Rs. 20,000/- in favour...
N. Appukuttan Pillai and anr. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-18-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ965
ORDERD. Sreedevi, J.1. Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in C.C. No. 20 of 1996 on the file of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Kollam, had registered Crime No. 1 of 1995 of the Vigilance Police Station, Kollam on 14-3-1995, under Sections 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, against the petitioners, alleging that the first accused, who was the village Officer of Palliman Village committed forgery and changed his date of birth in his SSLC Book and School Records as 7-11-1115 M.E., while his correct date of birth is 7-1 -1115 ML E. and entered into criminal conspiracy with the second accused, who changed the date of birth of the first accused in his Service Book as 20-6-1940 instead of 23-8-1939, on the basis of the certificate issued from the State Librarian and allowed the first accused to continue in se...
P.K. Anthumayi and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-18-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)ALT(Cri)315; 1999CriLJ1179
ORDERD. Sreedevi, J.1. This Cri. M. C. has been filed by the petitioners to quash Annexures A-1 and A-2 in S.T.C. No. 2745 of 1995 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Hosdrug in Crime No. 272 of 1995 of the Hosdrug Police Station. The first petitioner is a fishmonger by profession. Petitioners 2 to 9 are also engaged in the business of fishing. They were charged for offences punishable under Sections 7 and 8 of the Kerala Gaming Act. Annexure A-1 is the first information report in Crime No. 272 of 1995, and Annexure A-2 is the charge against them.2. The prosecution case is that on 16-5-1995 at about 3.10 p.m., the petitioners were found playing cards in Room No. XI/172 belonging to the first petitioner and hence committed offences under Sections 7 and 8 of the Kerala Gaming Act. Annexure A-2 is the charge sheet filed against the petitioners. According to the petitioners, even as per the first information report and charge-sheet the petitioners were found playing cards in a privat...
Ooppoottil Kurian and Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Comwssioner of Incowm Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-18-1998
Reported in: (1999)153CTR(Ker)316
OM PRAMASH, C.J.By this application made under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, the assessee requires us to direct the Tribunal to refer the following questions relating to the asst. yrs. 1987-88 and 1988-89 for the opinion of this Court :(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in not entertaining the additional grounds as referred in the order of the Tribunal?(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the additional grounds of appeal is on an issue which was not the subject-matter of appeal before the assessing authority as well as the first appellate authority?(iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the interest paid on money borrowed by which the property constructed is not allowable deduction, since such interest was not payable to the partners of United Investment Corporation by t...
K.G. Keshava Bhat Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-17-1998
Reported in: [1999]240ITR313(Ker)
Om Prakash, C.J.1. These four sets of T.R.Cs. raise a very important and interesting question for consideration whether the benefit of compounding under Section 13(1) of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1991 (briefly, 'the Act'), can be. availed of by tenants-in-common.2. Sub-section (9B) of Section 13 of the Act, which was inserted by Act 19 of 1994 with effect from April 1, 1994, is as under :'(9B) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (9), any person holding landed property as tenants-in-common may opt to pay tax in accordance with the provisions of this section if,--(i) all the other tenants opt to pay tax under this section, and (ii) the share of each tenant in the common tenancy together with his individual property does not exceed the limit specified under Sub-section (1)'.3. After insertion of Sub-section (9B), tenants-in-common, undoubtedly, can avail of the benefit of compounding under Section 13(1). But, we are concerned in the instant TRCs with the consec...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Commonwealth Trust India Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-16-1998
Reported in: [1999]240ITR758(Ker)
Om Prakash, C.J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question for the assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that Section 40A(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is not applicable to the facts of this case and that the assessee was entitled to a further deduction of Rs. 82,500 ?'2. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) disallowed the claim of the assessee under Section 40A(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), observing as under :'9. Addition under Section 40A(8) :The Commonwealth Trust Ltd. (London), became amalgamated with the Indian company Commonwealth Trust (India) Ltd., with effect from October 1, 1977, as a result of the scheme of amalgamation finally approved by the High Court of Kerala by their order dated June 5, 1980, with effect from October 1, 1977. As a result of this order a...
Saly Joseph Vs. Baby Thomas
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-16-1998
Reported in: II(1999)DMC309
Sreedevi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned single Judge dated 23-1-1998 in O.P. No. 3008 of 1996 of this Court, by which the appellant's application for a decree of nullity of marriage was dismissed.2. The appellant and the respondent are Christians and their marriage was solemnised as per the religious customs and ceremonies on 9-2-1994 at St. Thomas Church, Retnagiri, Pattithanam. Thereafter, they lived together till 10-3-1994.3. The petitioner is a staff nurse employed in Doha under the Ministry of Quater from March, 1992 onwards. The petitioner would allege that the respondent and his people made her and her people to believe that he has passed Pre-degree Examination and two years Diploma Course in Air Conditioning and is employed as Air Condition Mechanic in the Government Service in Behrin on a monthly salary of Rs. 30,000/-, with free boarding and lodging and annual leave of two months with free passage to go home. As Beharin is of only...
Mrs. Mary John Vs. Vallathol Nagar Grama Panchayat and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-16-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Ker161
P. Shanmugam, J.1. Both these Original Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the same petitioner. The prayers in these petitions are to quash the orders disqualifying the petitioner from the membership of the Panchayat and for a declaration to declare that Section 35(k) of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act, 1994, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', to the extent of limiting the period of absence for disqualification to 'if within the said period not less than three meetings have been held' is arbitrary and unconstitutional.2. Petitioner is a resident of Vallathol Nagar Grama Panchayath. She is a well-known social worker, professional artist and an organiser. She was elected as a member of the Panchayath from Ward No. 111 which was reserved for women, during October, 1995 as an independent candidate. The Panchayath has 10 seats out of which six were won by the L.D.F. and the other three seats were won by candidates from BJP, Muslim League and Congress on ea...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Nalini Bai V. Saraf
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-16-1998
Reported in: [1999]237ITR15(Ker)
Om Prakash, C.J. 1. By a petition made under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, the Revenue sought reference of as many as five questions. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred only questions Nos. 1 and 5 for the opinion of this court and declined to refer the remaining questions. Question No. 4 in the application made under Section 64(1) was as follows : '4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the refunds that were given to the accountable person subsequent to the death of a person is property capable of being passed on at the time of death ?' 2. Learned senior standing counsel presses before us only the abovementioned question No. 4 which, in our opinion, is a question of law. We, therefore, direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and refer the abovementioned question No. 4 only for the opinion of this court. 3. The application is accordingly allowed. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »