Kerala Court January 1999 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.
Rajendra Prabhu Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-05-1999
Reported in: 1999(107)ELT293(Ker)
K. Narayana Kurup, J.1. The second petitioner as an eligible passenger imported 42 gold biscuits weighing 4897.2 grms. and paid Customs duty of Rs. 1,07,738/- as borne out by Ext. P1 baggage receipt dt. 19-10-1994. Out of the aforesaid 42 gold biscuits, the second petitioner on 22-10-1994 entrusted the first petitioner (a goldsmith by profession) 30 gold biscuits for finding out intending purchasers. While the first petitioner was going to Coimbatore in a taxi car with the 30 gold biscuits, the Circle Inspector of Police, Chalakudy apprehended the first petitioner at Potta junction, Chalakudy at about 3 a.m. on 22-10-1994 during the course of a routine search of vehicles and took into custody an air bag containing the aforesaid gold biscuits under a mahazar. Thereafter the police handed over the first petitioner and the gold to the Superintendent of Customs, Special Unit. Kodungalloor on the evening of 22-10-1994. The Customs authorities prepared Ext. P2 mahazar and seized the gold und...
L.R. Rangaier and Sons Vs. Coffee Board and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-04-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Ker258; [1999]97CompCas205(Ker)
Mohammed, J.1. This appeal under Section 483 of the Companies Act, 1956 is directed against the order of the learned company Judge allowing substitution of a creditor for original petitioner under Rule 101 of he Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') The said order was passed in Application No. 96 of 1996 in C. P. No. 8 of 1990 (in the matter of L. R. Rangaier and Sons Pvt. Ltd. (In liquidation). The company (in liquidation) -- respondent No. 4 in the application is the appellant and the first respondent coffee board is the applicant. The appellant-company was incorporated on 16 9-1954 with 950 shares of Rs. 500/- each as paid up capital.2. The Company Petition No. 8 of 1990 was filed by two creditors seeking to wind up the company under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In this Company Petition, the Coffee Board has filed an application No. 96 of 1996 praying to substitute it as petitioner thereon. T...
K. A. Sudesh Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-02-1999
Reported in: (1999)154CTR(Ker)482
ORDERThe present original petition has been filed questioning the correctness of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Assessment), Special Range, Trivandrum (Ist respondent) dated 1- 12-1993 and a copy of the same is marked as Ext. P8.2. The second respondent, which is a private limited company, proposed to sell some property in favour of the petitioners herein. As the sale consideration exceeds rupees two lakhs, as required under section 230A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), an application was made for the issuance of the certificate which alone would enable the parties to get the document registered. In this case, the application was made by the petitioners. In the order dated 1-12-1993, the first respondent has expressed his inability to issue a certificate under section 230A of the Act unless all the legal requirements for issue of the same are satisfied by the second respondent. Aggrieved by this, the present original petiti...
P. Prathapachandran and anr. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and o ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-02-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALT(Cri)163; 1999CriLJ2002
ORDERK.A. Mohamed Shafi, J.1. Accused 2 and 3 in C. C. No. 1/94 on the file of the Special Judge, CBI Court-11, Ernakulam are the petitioners. This petition is filed to quash the entire criminal proceeding initiated against them. Petitioners and 3 other accused persons were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 471 and 168 read with Section 120B, IPC and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, on the basis of the charge-sheet laid by the Inspector of Police, CBI/ SPE, Cochin. Petitioners raised several objections before the Special Judge to the effect that the prosecution is invalid for want of proper sanction to prosecute them.2. It is seen that the prosecution against the petitioner and other accused were launched alleging criminal conspiracy, misappropriation etc. during the period 20-6-89 to 26-2-90. Though all the accused raised objection regarding want of proper sanction to prosecute them, only the petitioners ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›