Kerala Court September 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.
M.D. Hair Babu Vs. Returning Officer, Kudayathoor Service Co-operative ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-14-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Ker5
ORDERK.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The question that has come up for consideration in this case is whether Returning Officer is justified in rejecting the petitioner's nomination under Rule 35(3)(e)(ii) of the Co-operative Societies Rules, since nomination was not attested by an Advocate/Gazetted Officer.2. Ext. P.1 is the election notification dated 17-8-98 published by the Returning Officer. The notification specifically says that the candidate has to submit nomination paper along with the affidavit duly attested. Registrar has also issueda circular insisting attestation of the affidavit by an Advocate/Gazetted Officer/Rectification Officer.3. Petitioner's nomination was scrutinised by the Returning Officer on 27-8-1998. On scrutiny it was round that nomination was not filed in compliance with Rule 35(3)(c)(ii) of the Cooperative Societies Rules and was rejected. Aggrieved by the same petitioner has filed this writ petition.4. The main contention raised by counsel for petitioner is that a...
Suja Varghese and Etc. Vs. Indian Oil Corporation, CochIn and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-14-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Ker372
ORDERS. Sankarasubban, J.1. C.R.P. Nos. 1154 and 1163 of 1998 arise from O.S. No. 163 of 1997 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Adoor while C.R.P. Nos. 1273 and 1347 of 1998 arise from O.S. No. 161 of 1997 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Adoor, The revision petitioner Suja Varghese was the plaintiff in O.S. No. 163/1997 while the revision petitioner Mathew Daniel was the plaintiff in O.S. No. 161/97. According to the plaintiffs, both of them were the consumers of cooking gas from the Indian Oil Corporation through their agent at Adoor. They were issued domestic gas consumer cards and they were getting supply of cooking gas from 17-7-1990 upto 23-12-1996. Domestic gas consumer number of Suja Varghese is 8811613 while that of Mathew Daniel is 8759837.2. The case of the plaintiffs is that from 4-1-1997 onwards cooking gas was not supplied to the plaintiffs on the ground that the agent has committed some illegalities. Hence, the suits were instituted for a mandatory injunction direct...
Beena Metals Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)154CTR(Ker)150
Om Prakash, CJ :The Tribunal referred the following questions relating to the assessment year 1987-88 under s. 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the opinion of this Court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act?2. Whether, there were materials for the Tribunal to come to the conclusion that there was concealment of income to the extent of Rs. 1,61,459 by the applicant?'2. The facts, as gleaned from the penalty order, are thus: The assessee filed return of income on 30-10-1987 declaring a total income of Rs. 2,10,460. Thereafter, a revised return was filed on 23-3-1988, declaring total income at Rs. 3,76,920. Again a revised return was filed on 13-6-1988 declaring a total income of Rs. 4,21,920 on which assessment was completed on 1-3-1989. A penalty notice was issued simultaneously calling upon the assessee to show cause why penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the...
Paradesi Thyagarajan S. Vs. High Court of Kerala and State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)ILLJ113Ker
Ar. Lakshmanan, J.1. Heard M/s. P.K. Suresh Kumar and M. R. Sreelatha for the petitioner and Government Pleader for the respondents.2. The appellant, aggrieved against the judgment in O.P. No. 7958 of 1998 dated April 28, 1998, preferred the above appeal. The appellant was a member of the Kerala Judicial Service and was working as a Subordinate Judge at Kattappana. A Committee constituted and headed by the Chief Justice of the High Court of Kerala, on the basis of records of service and performance during the last five years, assessed and evaluated the potential for the continued utility of the service of the appellant and, on such evaluation, the Committee came to the opinion that the appellant does not have the potential for continued useful service. The opinion of the Committee of the Hon'ble Judges was considered by the High Court and the High Court also was not satisfied about the continued utility of the service of the appellant. Accordingly, the High Court decided to compulsoril...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nani Janaki and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-09-1998
Reported in: 1999ACJ788; [1999]95CompCas85(Ker)
P.A. Mohammed, J. 1. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the third respondent in O. P. (M. V.) No. 1339 of 1987 of the M. A. C. T., Kollam, is the appellant before us. Respondents Nos. 1 to 4 are the claimants who are the legal heirs of the deceased, Ramakrishnan Achary, who died on May 9, 1987, as a result of the injuries sustained by him in the accident involving vehicle No. KRQ 3057. They claimed an amount of Rs. 50,000 as compensation for the death of Ramakrishnan Achary. After the enquiry the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 37,000 with 12 per cent. interest as compensation. The Tribunal, however, directed the appellant to indemnify the owner of the vehicle for the compensation awarded. The insurance company, being dissatisfied with the above award, filed the present appeal.2. The standing counsel for the insurance company very forcefully argued before us that the appellant was not liable to indemnify the owner inasmuch as the offending vehicle had been used in violation of the p...
Nixon M. Joseph and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-08-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Ker385
ORDERK. Narayana Kurup, J.1. Having regard to the manner in which I propose to dispose of this Original Petition, I am satisfied that notice to the 5th respondent is not necessary. Accordingly, notice to the 5th respondent is dispensed with. Service of notice to other respondents is complete and counsel(s) heard.2. This writ petition filed in the nature of' Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to declare the candidature of the 5th respondent as null and void and for a direction to the first respondent' restraining the retired Judges of High Court and Supreme Court from contesting in the election to the Union and State Legislatures within 10 years of the retirement' and for a direction commanding the 4th respondent to conduct an enquiry into the allegations raised against the 5th respondent in Exts. PI and P2 news reports and for a declaration that retired Judges are not entitled to be appointed as Commissions under the ...
Kerala Soaps and Oils Ltd. Vs. V.T. Valsan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-08-1998
Reported in: (1999)IILLJ77Ker
Mohammed, J. 1. This appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act') is filed against the order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Kozhikode in W.C.C. No. 37 of 1990. The opposite party before the Commissioner is the appellant before us and the 1st respondent herein was the applicant before the Commissioner. The above application has been filed under Section 22 of the Act by the 1st respondent claiming compensation for the personal injuries sustained by him on July 20, 1989 in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment under the appellant. After the enquiry the Commissioner awarded a compensation or Rs. 92,516/- with 6% interest from the date of accident. The opposite party M/s. Kerala Soaps and Oils Ltd., Kozhikode being aggrieved by the said order, filed the present appeal.2. On behalf of the appellant the counsel challenged the finding of the Commissioner that the 1st respondent was the 'workman' coming within th...
State of Kerala Vs. Ramaniamma and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-07-1998
Reported in: 1999ACJ1226; (2000)ILLJ129Ker
Mohammed, J.1. The sole question that arises for decision in this appeal is whether the worker Sri Nagappan Nair died arising out of and in the course of employment under 2nd appellant. The appellants before us are the State of Kerala and the Assistant Director of Dairy Development, Quality Control Officer, Quality Control Unit, Trivandrum. The respondents are the legal representatives and dependents of Sri Nagappan Nair who died on March 20, 1990 due to heart attack. An application has been filed by the respondents under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act') claiming compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- After the enquiry the Commissioner found that Nagappan Nair died in the course of employment having sustained the injuries resulting in his death. Consequently, commissioner awarded a compensation of Rs. 65,228/- with 6% interest.2. The Government Pleader on behalf of the appellants argued before us that the finding of the Commissioner that Nagappan Nair di...
Palakkapalliyalil Alimohammed Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-07-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4047
K. Narayana Kurup, J.1. The prayer in this Original Petition is for the issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing Ext. R2(a) Preventive Detention Order passed by the 2nd respondent Commissioner and Secretary to Government (Home), Trivandrum against the petitioner under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short 'the Act'). Ext. R2(a) order is under challenge in this Original Petition on various grounds. At the admission stage Mr. T.P. Kelu Nambiar, learned Senior Advocate and the learned Additional Advocate General entered appearance for the petitioner and State respectively and the O.P. itself was heard at length. Though it is mentioned in the statement dated 10-3-1998 filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent that 'the 2nd respondent craves leave to file a detailed counter-affidavit in due course', neither any leave was sought after filing the statement nor any affidavit filed till date.2. From the statement of facts of t...
Travancore Titanium Products Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-02-1998
Reported in: (1999)154CTR(Ker)383
OM PRAKASH, C. J. Heard counsel for the parties.2. Though the Tribunal has referred as many as four questions under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (briefly 'the Act') for the opinion of this Court, all the questions revolve around the controversy whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the ITO was right in law in charging interest under s. 216 of the Act.3.The short submission of learned counsel for the assessee is that an adverse finding was recorded by the Tribunal without giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and without considering materials available on record.4. This reference has been made on a second round. When the reference was made earlier, the Court remitted the case to the Tribunal for reconsideration. The finding of the Tribunal in para. 3 of its order dt. 1st Dec., 1993, is as follows:'3. After restoration of the appeal, the case was first posted on 17th Feb., 1993, and at the request of the assessee it was adjourned. On 23rd March, 1993, it was ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›