Kerala Court April 2000 Judgments
A.M. Ali and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-19-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2721
ORDERK.V. Sankaranarayanan, J.1. The Sub Inspector of Police, North Parur has registered a case as Crime No. 107/2000 on a complaint from one Appu against the first petitioner and others for offences including one under Section 3(1)(XV) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prayer in these petitions is to quash the complaint. It is contended that the First Information Report does not make out a case under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. From a perusal of the First Information Statement it is not possible to say that such a case is not made out. So there is no scope for quashing the complaint at this stage. It is for the investigating agency to collect evidence and examine whether there is scope for filing a final report under the provisions of the Act also.2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that since the case is triable by Sessions Court, the petitioners will not be granted bail ...
Tag this Judgment!P.A. Haridasan Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-13-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Ker313
Sankarasubban, J.1. Petitioner -- P. A. Haridasan, is a member of the Subordinate Judicial Service of the Kerala State. He entered into the judicial service as judicial Magistrate of Second Class and now he is working as Judicial First Class Magistrate. The controversy in this case is regarding the caste to which the petitioner belongs. While the petitioner claims that he belongs to Thandan community, respondents 1 and 2 are taking the view that he belongs to Thiyya community. The Thandan community was declared to be a Scheduled Caste so far as theTravancore-Cochin area is concerned from 1950 onwards. But it was extended to the whole of Kerala only by Act 108 of 1976. The entire controversy arose because petitioner's caste in the High School Certificate was originally described as Thiyya but after the coming into force of Act 108 of 1976, petitioner got it corrected and changed it to Thandan. It was after this petitioner applied for the post of Magistrate under the General Recruitment ...
Tag this Judgment!Muhammed and ors. Vs. Moideen Haji and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-07-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Ker329
K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J.1. The plaintiffs who lost the suit concurrently before the Courts below are the appellants. The suit is of representative character. The dispute raised in the suit is as to whether religious discourse called 'Khutuba' in a mosque in connection with the Juma prayer on Friday can also be in verancular along with its essential ingredients in Arabic. In other words, whether the gathering can be addressed in local language during the course of the 'Khutuba' itself. There was a contention that this was not a matter for resolution by Civil Courts and therefore, the suit was not maintainable. The trial Court accepted that contention and held that such a dispute cannot be said to be 'one which the Court is entitled to decide'. As there was dispute on the issue among the members of the congregation, the Assistant Collector had initiated proceedings. M.C. 21/67, and had issued Ext. A 1 order that A party therein shall not interfere with the performance of 'Khutuba' in Malaya...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Muthoot Bankers
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-06-2000
Reported in: [2001]247ITR27(Ker)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following questions have been referred to this court under section 256(1) of the income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act'), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (in short, 'the Tribunal') :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also going by the test of prudence and human probabilities, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the entries evidencing the payment of interest and deposit of interest in the loan account of the minor in instalments cannot be dismissed as mere journal entries or book entries and is not the above finding wrong and against realities ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is not the so called transactions of payment of interest, deposit of interest in the loan account of the minor hit by the provisions contained in section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case : (a...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K.V. Mankaram and Co.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-06-2000
Reported in: (2000)162CTR(Ker)357; [2000]245ITR353(Ker)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J. 1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), has been filed by the Revenue. According to it, the following questions arise out of an order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench (in short the 'Tribunal'), which need adjudication : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the failure on the part of the assessee to furnish along with the return of income a certified copy of the partnership deed dated June 6, 1996, evidencing the change in the constitution of the firm and is mandatory under Section 184(4), the Tribunal is right in interfering with the order of the assessing authority passed under Section 143(1)(a) determining the status of an association of persons under Section 185 of the Income-tax Act 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case- (i) the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the Assessing Officer has exceeded the jurisdiction under Se...
Tag this Judgment!A.G.M. (P), Syndicate Bank and ors. Vs. B.K. Mahim
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-06-2000
Reported in: (2001)ILLJ52Ker
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the Syndicate Bank and its officers against the judgment of the learned single Judge interfering with the order of dismissal of the first respondent from service on the basis of Syndicate Bank Officer Employees (Conduct) Regulations, 1976. Learned single Judge also set aside the enquiry report dated July 20, 1989 and various orders issued pursuant thereto.2. Short facts which are necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows. One M. Damodaran, applied for a vehicle loan of Rs. 17,000/-, from the Mulleria Branch of the Syndicate Bank for the purchase of a new autorikshaw. First respondent was functioning as the Manager of the said Branch at that time. First respondent-delinquent Officer agreed to arrange the loan, and as a precondition complainant was directed to remit margin money of Rs. 6000/- Complainant remitted the margin money in various instalments, final instalment of which was remitted on September 1, 1984. For sanc...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Muthoot Bankers
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-06-2000
Reported in: [2000]111TAXMAN385(Ker)
Pasayat, CJ.At the instance of the revenue, following questions have been referred to this court under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Income Tax Act by the Tribunal, Cochin Bench :'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also going by the test of prudence and human probabilities, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the entries evidencing the payment of interest and deposit of interest in the loan account of the minor in instalments cannot be dismissed as mere journal entries or book entries and is not the above finding wrong and against realities ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is not the socalled transactions of payment of interest, deposit of interest in the loan account of the minor hit by the provisions contained in section 40A(3) of' the Income Tax Act 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case:-(a) the payment of interest in cash was justified under rule 6DD(J) of the Income-...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. K.V. Manakram and Co.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-06-2000
Reported in: [2000]111TAXMAN439(Ker)
Pasayat, C.J.This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Income Tax Act has been filed by the revenue. According to it, following questions arise out of order passed by the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, which need adjudication:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and iii view of the failure on the part of the assessee to furnish along with the return of income, a certified copy of the partnership deed dated 6-6-1996 evidencing the change in the constitution of the firm and is mandatory under section 184(4), the Tribunal is right in interfering with the order of the assessing authority passed under section 143(1)(i) determining the status of an AOP under section 185 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case-(i) the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessing officer has exceeded the jurisdiction under section 143(1)(a) while changing the status of the assessee to AOP which could be done under ...
Tag this Judgment!Janeeva Saw Mills Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-05-2000
Reported in: [2000]120STC395(Ker)
Pasayat, C.J.1. Heard.2. Challenge in this application under Section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (in short 'the Act') is to the rejection of the appeal filed by the assessee by the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Ernakulam (in short 'the Tribunal').3. Appeal filed for the assessment year 1994-95 was dismissed on the ground that the first appeal filed before the appellate authority had been rightly rejected as admitted tax had not been paid. It is not in dispute that the admitted tax had not been paid. The reason for which admitted tax could not be paid had already been indicated by the assessee. Subsequently admitted tax has been paid. Considering the same we feel that this is a fit case where appeal should be admitted by the first appellate authority for disposal on merits, if the appeal is otherwise free from defects..T.R.C. is disposed of as indicated above....
Tag this Judgment!Rajan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-04-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3531
Arijit Pasayat, C.J. 1. Questioning the conviction for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (inshort, the Code) and sentence of imprison ment for life and fine of Rs. 2,000/ with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for three months, this appeal has been filed by appellant Rajan (hereinafter referred to as accused). Learned Sessions Judge, Thodupuzha found the accused guilty, con victed and entenced him as aforesaid.2. Filtering out unnecessary details,prosecution case is as follows : Mathradevi (hereinafter referred to as deceased) was the wife of one Thankavelu. They had two children from the wedlock. Accused developed illegitimate intimacy with deceased and they were living as husband and wife. Accused was unmarried. Subsequently, his parents arranged a marriage for him. Deceased raised protest and on account of that enmity, ac cused murdered her by trangulating with her saree on 7 3 1993 at 10.30 a.m. Place of occurrence is alleged to be Karim...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »