Kerala Court June 1998 Judgments
J. Krishnan Nair Vs. P. Jaseentha and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-30-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)ALD(Cri)755; [1999]98CompCas367(Ker); 1998CriLJ3913
P.V. Narayanan Nambiar, J.1. The revision petitioner was the accused in C. C. No. 64 of 1991 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Attingal, who was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act'), and to pay compensation of Rs. 13,600 to the complainant under Section 357(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months more. He was ordered to pay Rs. 1,500 towards costs and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for thirty days. The appeal preferred by him before the court of session, Trivandrum, was dismissed as per judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 255 of 1992. Hence, this revision.2. The complaint in which the revision petitioner was convicted was filed by the first respondent alleging offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act. It is the case of the complainant that the accused borrowed from her an amoun...
Tag this Judgment!T.S. Sujatha Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-30-1998
Reported in: [1999]238ITR599(Ker)
P. Shanmugam, J. 1. The petitioner is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961. A notice issued under Section 158BD of the Act by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Investigation Circle, Kottayam, is challenged in this writ petition.2. Learned senior counsel, Mr. Ramachandran, made two submissions. According to him, the third respondent has no jurisdiction in the matter. He submits that exhibit R-3(A) notification enabling the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Investigation Circle, to exercise jurisdiction for the connected cases/persons also, cannot apply to the case of the petitioner. The petitioner is an independent assessee and her case cannot be said to be connected with the assessment of her husband, Mr. M. K. Thankachan. The expression 'connected case' has no legal connotation and, therefore, unless the Assistant Commissioner records his satisfaction that undisclosed income belongs to the petitioner, he cannot proceed with the assess ment.3. Learned senior standing ...
Tag this Judgment!Raghavan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-30-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3649
ORDERS. Marimuthu, J.1. This petition has come before this Court for review of the order passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Thrissur, framing charge against the petitioner, his wife and son in S.C. Nos. 88 and 89 of 1994. In S.C. No. 88 of 1994, first accused is the present petitioner, father and the 2nd accused is his son. In S.C. No. 89 of 1994, first accused is the son, 2nd accused is the father and the 3rd accused is the mother.2. The facts as culled out from the arguments of the learned counsel, Mr. Manojkumar, for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, Mr. S.U. Nazar, are summarised hereunder: On 4-7-1992 at about 6.30 p.m., the victim by name Sumathi, wife of the son accused Balakrishnan and daughter-in-law of the other two accused, Raghavan (present petitioner) and Ammalu, committed suicide by jumping into the well. On the complaint lodged by one of the brother of the deceased to the police on 5-7-1992, a case was registered in Crime No. 69/92 of Erumapetty Poli...
Tag this Judgment!Executive Officer, Wadakkancherry Panchayat Vs. P.P. Abdul Rahiman and ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-30-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4213
ORDERS. Marimuthu, J.1. This petition has been filed by the Executive Officer, Wadakkancherry Panchayat for obtaining leave under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. to file a criminal appeal against the acquittal. I heard Mr. Siby Mathew, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.P. Sreekumar, learned counsel for the first respondent. From their submissions and on the basis of the materials now available before this Court, the criminal appeal itself can be disposed of today. Therefore, this petition is allowed granting leave to the petitioner and the Crl. Appeal is numbered as 472 of 1998.2. The appellant-Panchayat, according to its case, let out one of its shop rooms, No. 5 of the Shopping Centre Building to the first respondent for a monthly rent of Rs. 3,500/-. First respondent defaulted in the payment of rent. Therefore, a statutory notice was issued by the appellant as contemplated in Rule 13 of the Kerala Panchayats (Taxation and Appeal) Rules 1963 framed under the parent Act, Kerala Panc...
Tag this Judgment!T.S. Smatha Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-30-1998
Reported in: (1998)149CTR(Ker)343
P. Shanatugam, J.Petitioner is an assessee under the IT Act. A notice issued under s. 158BD of the Act by the Asstt. CIT, Investigation Circle, Kottayam, is challenged in this writ petition.2. Learned senior counsel. Mr. Ramachandran made two submissions. According to him the 3rd respondent has no jurisdiction in the matter. He submits that Ext. P3(a) notification enabling the Asstt. CIT, Investigation Circle to exercise jurisdiction for the connected cases/persons also, cannot apply to the cease of the petitioner. Petitioner is an independent assessee and her case cannot be said to be connected with the assessment of her husband, Mr. M.K. Thankachan. The expression 'connected case' has no legal connotation and, therefore, unless the Asstt. CIT records his satisfaction that undisclosed income belongs to the petitioner, he cannot proceed with the assessment.3. The learned senior standing counsel Mr. Raveendranatha Menon while countering the said argument has submitted that s. 177(3) is ...
Tag this Judgment!Sasikumar B. Menon Vs. S. Vijayan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-30-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)ALT(Cri)458; 1998CriLJ3973
ORDERP.V. Narayana Nambiar, J.1. A complaint was filed by the first respondent against the petitioner and three others alleging offence punishable under Section 500 read with Section 34, I.P.C. which was taken on file by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam as C.C.No. 732 of 1996 and process was issued to the accused. The petitioner who is the first accused prays for quashing the proceedings pending against him.2. Petitioner is the President of Asianet Communications Limited which is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. The allegations in the complaint, a copy of which is Annexure I, are briefly shown below :3. The complainant is employed as the Regional Superintendent, Narcotic Control Bureau, Trivandrum, He was previously working as Special Branch, Inspector, Trivandrum City. At that time, one Mariyam Rasheeda, a Maladives national was found staying in India even after the date of expiry of her visa and hence, Crime No. 225 of 1996 of Vanchiyoor Poli...
Tag this Judgment!Pratap K. Pothen Vs. Circle Inspector of Police and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-29-1998
Reported in: [1999]238ITR290(Ker)
K. Narayana Kurup, J.1. The petitioner was a passenger bound for Madras from the Trivandrum domestic airport in the Jet Airways flight on October 1, 1997. After the baggage of the petitioner was screened through the screening machine at the domestic airport, the first respondent, Circle Inspector of Police, Airport Security, directed the petitioner to open the baggage. The baggage was opened and an amount of nearly Rs. 6 lakhs which was kept in the baggage was seized by the first respondent. Thereupon, the petitioner also voluntarily disclosed to the first respondent that another amount of Rs. 5.75 lakhs is also in the possession of the petitioner and the same has been kept in the other baggage which has been sent to the cabin of the aircraft. Then the first respondent brought the cabin baggage and the same was also opened and cash found in it namely, a sum of Rs. 5.75 lakhs was also seized by the first respondent. The petitioner informed the first respondent that a total amount of Rs....
Tag this Judgment!Pratap K. Pothen Vs. Circle Inspector of Police and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-29-1998
Reported in: (1998)149CTR(Ker)231
K. Narayana Kur up, J:The petitioner was a passenger bound for Madras from the Trivandrum Domestic Airport in the Jet Airways flight on 1-10-1997. After the baggage of the petitioner was screened through the screening machine at the Domestic Airport, the first respondent Circle Inspector of Police, Airport Security, directed the petitioner to open the baggage. The baggage was opened and an amount of nearly Rs. 6 lakh which was kept in the baggage was seized by the first respondent. Thereupon, the petitioner also voluntarily disclosed to the first respondent that another amount of Rs. 5.75 lakh is also in the possession of the petitioner and the same has been kept in the other baggage which has been sent to the cabin of the aircraft. Then the first respondent brought the cabin baggage and the same was also opened and cash found in it namely, a sum of Rs. 5.75 lakh was also seized by the first respondent. The petitioner informed the first respondent that a total amount of Rs. 11.75 lakh ...
Tag this Judgment!Swamy Boohananda and 4 ors. Vs. Secretary, Travancore Devaswom Board, ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-26-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Ker337
Ar. Lakshmanan, J. 1. The Travancore Devaswom Board, represented by its Secretary filed C.M.P. 13924/-98 to grant permission for having the work of gold covering the roof of the Sree Ayyappa Swami temple at Sabarimala and the allied works undertaken to be done by Dr. Vijaya Mallaya, Chairman of the U.B. Group of Industries, Bangalore. This application was filed during the vacation in view of the urgency mentioned in the affidavit tiled in support of the said petition. It is stated that Dr. Vijaya Mallaya had expressed his desire to gold cover the Sreekovil of the Sree Ayyappaswami Temple at Sabarimal as an offering by him and that the thantri of the temple has given his assent for the work promised to be done by Dr. Vijaya Mallaya. After consulting the Devaswom Commission and the Chief Engineer (Projects) who is in charge of the works at Sabarimala the Board has accepted the offer since the offering was one which would add to the sanctity and solemnity of the temple. The donor has agre...
Tag this Judgment!Beauty Umbrella Mart Vs. Intelligence Officer, Special Squad, Inter-st ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-26-1998
Reported in: [1998]111STC774(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The matter arises under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. The question involved in this original petition is regarding the legality of the penalty order, exhibit P3, passed by the first respondent under Section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 as confirmed in second revision as per exhibit P5 order passed by the second respondent.2. The petitioner is a dealer in stationery items, watches, clocks, umbrellas, rain coats, etc., and an assessee on the files of the Sales Tax Officer, IIIrd Circle, Thiruvananthapuram. A copy of the sale bill No. 86, dated March 7, 1986 issued by the petitioner in favour of the Controller of Examinations, University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram, gathered by the Inter-State Investigation Cell, Trivandrum of the Sales Tax Department led to the proceedings against the petitioner under Section 45A of the Act. As per the said bill, the petitioner supplied the following items of goods to the University of Kerala :1. Jute twine...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »