Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR2001Ker60
Sankarasubban, J.1. These Writ Appeals are filed by the State of Kerala and also other Officials of the Public Works Department. In these Writ Appeals, the challenge is against the judgment of the learned single Judge directing the appellants to pay the respondents the amount covered by the bills for the work done by them as contractors.2. Petitioners in the Original Petitions are contractors registered with the Government of Kerala. They have undertaken works on the basis of contract for the construction of roads, bridges, etc. The contract is awarded on the basis of tenders invited and thereafter, the contractor who has been chosen for the work, executes an agreement with the Government containing conditions regarding the governance of the contract. In all these cases, grievance of the petitioners is that even though the works undertaken by them has been completed, they were not paid the amounts due to them as per the final bills. The grievance appears to be that the works have been ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [2001]249ITR26(Ker)
M.R. Hariharan Nair, J.1. The challenge in the original petition is with regard to exhibit P-3 order passed by the Income-tax Settlement Commission, Madras, refusing registration for the firm represented by the petitioner under Section 184 of the Income-tax Act, 1961,2. Claiming that an oral partnership was entered into before the petitioner bid in an abkari auction, the petitioner moved for registration of the firm under the aforesaid section. It was contended that there were 11 partners. The deed of partnership which was subsequently registered was also produced. The Settlement Commission found that though there are 11 partners in the partnership deed, only seven of them had contributed to the bid amount and that in the circumstances there was no justification for registration of the firm.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the aforesaid aspect is not of any significance in so far as the petitioner had explained themanner in which the sum of Rs. 11,30,000 which was d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (2001)165CTR(Ker)594
M.R. Harmaran Nair, J.The challenge in the original petition is with regard to Ext. P3 order passed by the Income-tax Settlement Commission, Madras, refusing registration for the firm represented by the petitioner under section 184 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Claiming that an oral partnership was entered into before the petitioner bid in an 'Abkari' auction, the petitioner moved for registration of the firm under the aforesaid section. It was contended that there were 11 partners. The deed of registration which was subsequently registered was also produced. The Settlement Commission found that though there are 11 partners in the partnership deed, only 7 of them had contributed to the bid amount and that in the circumstances there was no justification for registration of the firm.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the aforesaid aspect is not of which the sum of Rs. 11,30,000 which was deposited as 30 per cent of the total any significance insofar as the petition...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [2001]248ITR761(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J. 6. Both these original petitions challenge the same order. Hence, they are heard together. The challenge in both these original petitions is against exhibit P-3 order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin, under Section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'). The facts which led to the filing of the original petitions are as follows :One P.V. Swamy was an assessee under the Act. He died on September 1, 1990. He has been assessed to income-tax up to the assessment year 1991-92. During the financial year 1994-95, the assessment of Sri P.V. Swamy for the assessment years 1982-83 up to 1987-88 and 1989-90 were revised and a sum of Rs. 21,52,500 was refunded to the legal heirs under Section 244 of the Act. The refunded amount included an amount of Rs. 8,34,479 being the interest calculated on the actual refund amount under Section 244(1A) based on revised assessment. The petitioners in these two original petitions are the legal heirs of the af...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (2001)165CTR(Ker)172
S. Sankarasubban, J.Both these original petitions challenge the same order. Hence, they are heard together. The challenge in both these original petitions is against Ext. P3 order passed by the Commissioner, Cochin under section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The facts which led to the filing of the original petitions are as follows:One P.V. Swamy was an assessee under the Act. He died on 1-9-1990. He has been assessed to income-tax upto the assessment year 1991-92. During the financial year 1994-95, the assessment of Sri P.V. Swamy for the assessment years 1982-83 upto 1987-88 and 1989-90 were revised and a sum of Rs. 21,52,500 was refunded to the legal heirs under section 244 of the Act. The refunded amount included an amount of Rs. 8,34,479 being the interest calculated on the actual refund amount under section 244(1A) based on revised assessment. The petitioners in these two original petitions are the legal heirs of the aforesaid P.V. Swamy....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR2001Ker101
D. Sreedevi, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the decree and judgment in A.S. No. 64/88 of the Sub Court, Kasaragod, which was filed against the decree and judgment in O.S. No. 208/82 of the Additional Munsiffs Court, Kasaragod. The plaintiff is the appellant. 2. The suit was filed by the plaintiff for possession of the portion of A schedule property which is alleged to have been trespassed by the first defendant for laying pipe line and for consequential mandatory injunction directing the first defendant to remove the pipe line within a time to be fixed by the Court and on failure of which to get it done through an officer of the Court at the expense of the first defendant. The plaintiff has also prayed for a decree of permanent injunction prohibiting the first defendant, his men and agents from trespassing Into or in any way interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the A schedule property by the plaintiff and defendants 2 to 9. 3. According to the plaintiff, the plaint A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2001(1)ALT(Cri)172; 2001CriLJ1281
ORDERJ.B. Koshy, J.1. Petitioner who was an accused in the Vypin Liquor Tragedy case was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years. The Supreme Court enhanced the above punishment to one of imprisonment for life. He wanted to set off the undertrial period spent by him in jail against the sentence of imprisonment under S. 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned single Judge before whom it was posted referred the matter to Division Bench.2. Since interpretation of S. 428 Cr. P.C. is involved, the above section is extracted below:'428. Period of detention undergone by the accused to be set off against the sentence of imprisonment- Where an accused person has, on conviction, been sentenced to imprisonment for a term, not being imprisonment in default of payment of fine, the period of detention, if any, undergone by him during the investigation, inquiry or trial of the same case and before the date of such conviction, shall set off against the term of imp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : I(2002)ACC603; 2002ACJ603
1. Appellant-insurance company questions the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Neyyattinkara awarding a total compensation of Rs. 48,940/- to the autorickshaw driver, who met with an accident when a cow, grazing at the side of the road, jumped on the road. There was a compound fracture of both bones of left leg and plaster applied. The claimant was a member of Taxi Drivers Co-operative society, wherein all the members are drivers. Claimant was in possession of the autorickshaw on the basis of Ext.XI hire purchase agreement from the society and District Co-operative Bank was financing the society for enabling the driver members to purchase autorickshaws drivers tot he society and they will become full owners only when the entire amount is paid. Even though there is a bald statement by the claimant in the deposition that he was employed by the society on monthly wages, no evidence was adduced to prove that he was an employee of the society. In fact, the finding of the Tribuna...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : II(2001)ACC117
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Appellant-Insurance Company questions the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Neyyattinkara awarding a total compensation of Rs. 48,940/- to the autorickshaw driver, who met with an accident. The claimant, who was driving Autorickshaw No. KBV 2596, met with an accident wher a cow, grazing at the side of the road, jumped on the road. There was a compound fracture of both bones of left leg and plaster applied. The claimant was a member of Taxi Drivers Co-operative Society, wherein all the members are drivers. Claimant was in possession of the autorickshaw on the basis of Ext. X1 hire purchase agreement from the society and District Co-operative Bank was financing the Society for enabling the driver members to purchase autorickshaws as per an agreement. The amount has to be repaid in monthly instalments by the autorickshaw drivers to the Society and they will become full owners only when the entire amount is paid. Even though there is a bald statement by the clai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2001CriLJ1304
J.B. Koshy, J. 1. After perusing the judgment in S.C. No. 55 of 1993 passed by the Court of Session, Kollam, this court has taken suo motu calendar revision invoking inherentpowers of the High Court under S. 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Meanwhile,the State also filed appeal against the same judgment. Hence both are heard together.The accused were charged sheeted by the Circle Inspector of Police, Punalur under Ss. 143, 147, 148, 324 and 302 r/w S. 149 of Indian Penal Code and Ss. 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The case of the prosecution as summarised by the Learned Sessions Judge is asfollows:'2. The case of the prosecution is as follows:- On 3.5.1992, Kunjupennu, the wife of CW11 died at 1 p.m. and the relatives of Kunjupennu and CW11 assembled in the house of CW11 for attending the burial ceremony. CW1 in this case is stated to be a member of Kurava community a scheduled caste. CW2 and her husband and their re...
Tag this Judgment!