Kerala Court March 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.
The Commissioner and Secretary to Govt. Higher Education Dept. Vs. Jay ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Ker167
Om Prakash, C.J. 1. This appeal is filed by the first respondent (appellant herein) challenging the impuged judgment dated January 14, 1997.2. The petitioner Trust in O.P. sought quashing of Ext. P5 order of Government expressing its inability to accord sanction for the establishment of a self-financing engineering college.3. The case of the petitioner (first respondent herein) is that it made an application for affiliation to the Mahatma Gandhi University, which deputed a team for inspection. The inspection team recommended to the University that the petitioner has sufficient infractructure to start the course during the academic year 1995-96 itself. The petitioner also made an application dated 24-6-1995 to the Government to accord sanction to start courses during the academic year 1995-96 itself. It is on this application, the Government passed impugned order (Ext. P. 5) dated 16-8-1996 regretting its inability to accord sanction, sought for.4. In the counter affidavit filed for res...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. P.V. Varghese
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: [1999]238ITR280(Ker)
Om Prakash, C.J. 1. Heard senior standing counsel for the Revenue. 2. This is an application made by the Revenue under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, requiring us to direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer the following question for the opinion of this court : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth-tax Act ?' 3. We have carefully gone through the order of the Appellate Tribunal, which has found that the assessee was a partner in two firms dealing in jewellery ; that these firms used to purchase old gold ornaments and hand them over to goldsmiths to manufacture new gold ornaments ; that the assessee has produced the goldsmith vouchers showing the ornaments making charges paid ; weight of old gold and its purity, wastage, etc. ; that from the vouchers produced by the assessee, it is clear that the firms in wh...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. P.N. Varghese
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: (1998)150CTR(Ker)225
OM PRAKASH, C JHeard senior standing counsel for the Revenue.2. This is an application made by the Revenue under s. 27(3) of the WT Act,1957 requiring us to direct the Tribunal to refer the following question for the opinion of this Court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to exemption under s. 5(1)(x~odi) of the WT Act T'3. We have carefully gone through the order of the Tribunal, which has found that the assessee was a partner in two firms dealing in jewellery; that these firms used to purchase old gold ornaments and hand them over to goldsmiths to manufacture new gold ornaments.' that the assessee has produced the goldsmith vouchers showing the ornament making charges paid; weight of old gold and its purity, wastage, etc., that from the vouchers produced by the assessee, it is clear that the firms in which the assessee was a partner were engaged in the business of manufacture of new gold jewel...
M.K. Kunhiraman Vs. Santha Alias Devaki
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-02-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Ker189
Ar. Lakshmanan, J.1. Husband is the appellant in this appeal. He married the respondent on 5-1-1975 and three children were born in the wedlock who were aged 16, 10 and 8 years. The appellant filed O.P. 68/93 on the file of the Family Court, Kozhikode against the respondent that on the night of 24-1-1993 when the appellant knocked at the door of the house where the wife was residing, he happened to see the respondent in the company of another man, in nude. He also saw the person running through the back door of the house and when the appellant questioned her the wife said that the person who was with her was one Kunhiraman. She also confessed that she was leading adulterous life with Kunhiraman for about 10 years. Therefore the appellant filed the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce.2. The respondent contested the petition contending that the appellant was always of a suspicious nature of her fidelity and the incident of 24-1-1993 averred in the petition is ...
Biju Vs. Sub-inspector of Police and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-02-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1927
ORDERS. Marimuthu, J.1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl. M.C. No. 3570/97 and the learned counsel appearing for the additional respondent, namely, Sakkir Hussain and also the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl. M.C. No. 3408 of 1997. I examine the submission of the learned counsel as well as the papers available before me. Their arguments as well as the papers available would disclose that a Maruthi Car bearing No. M.F.C. 8108 originally was owned by one Pushpa Raheja of Bombay who sold the same on 8-1-97 to one Biju who is the petitioner in Crl. M.C. No. 3408 of 1997. Biju in turn sold the vehicle to one Sakkir Hussain who has been brought on record as additional respondent in both these petitions. Sakkir then sold the vehicle to one Joseph on 22-1 -1997. Thereafter, the vehicle was sold by Joseph to Moideen the petitioner in Cril. M.C. No. 3570 on 12-2-1997. As there arose some dispute between the vendors and purchased with reference to ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›