Kerala Court September 2001 Judgments
Seena Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-28-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ1095
ORDERP.K. Balasubramanyan, J.1. This is a petition for dispensing with the production of the certified copy of the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in O.P. (MV) No. 1980 of 1996 against which the appeal is sought to be filed. The contention of the petitioners is that some other persons, who were claimants in O.P. (MV) 1979 of 1996 another independent application which was jointly tried with their claim, have filed an appeal and therein they have produced a certified copy of the award in O.P. (MV) No. 1979 of 1996. What is argued is that it is a common award in the three claims and hence the production of the certified copy of the award in this appeal may be dispensed with. We cannot agree with this submission. The three are independent claims, even though they might relate to or arise out of the same incident or accident. When there are three distinct claims, the claimants if aggrieved by the award in their respective claims have to file separate appeals. If the appellants ...
Tag this Judgment!Marakkar Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-28-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)ALT(Cri)443; 2002CriLJ456; 2002(81)ECC653
J.B. Koshy, J. 1. This criminal appeal is referred to the Division Bench by Justice M.R. Hariharan Nair noticing divergent views taken by two learned Single Judges of this court in Main v. State of Kerala (Crl. A. 127/99) and Rasheed v. State of Kerala (1999 (3) KLT 133). The only question to be resolved in this case is whether mandate of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the NDPS Act') is satisfied if accused is informed of and offered his legal right to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer without mentioning about the right to be searched before a Magistrate or vice versa as Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh (AIR 1999 SC 2378) held that before conducting search of a person under Section 42 or 43 of the NDPS Act, empowered officer shall inform him that he has got a right to be searched in the presence of the nearest Magistrate or Gazetted Officer and failure to inform h...
Tag this Judgment!Vijayan Vs. Syndicate Bank
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-27-2001
Reported in: [2000(87)FLR386]
K. Balakrishnan Nair, J.1. The question raised in this Appeal is whether disciplinary action can be initiated against an employee even after his acquittal by the criminal prosecution was launched. The brief facts leading to the case are the following.The appellant is an employee of the first respondent Syndicate Bank. He was suspended by the Bank by Ext. P1 order dated 14.7.1992 on allegation of fraud resulting in withdrawal of Rs. 2,90,500/- from the Bank during the period from 14.2.1991 to 18.6.1992. Information was lodged with the police which resulted in the registration of two criminal cases against him. The Central Bureau of Investigation prosecuted him for the offences under Sections 120B, 381, 419, 420, 468, 471 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He faced trial in two cases, CC Nos. 8/94 and 9/94 before the C.B.I. Special Judge, Ernakulam. He was acquitted in both the cases by Exts. P3 ...
Tag this Judgment!Eciyo Coconut Oils Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-26-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)ALT(Cri)123; 2002CriLJ1087
ORDERG. Sasidharan, J.1. This petition is filed by accused 1 to 3 in S.T. No. 3175 of 2000 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Perumbavoor praying that the proceedings in the above case may be quashed. The above case was taken on file on the basis of a complaint filed by the Inspector of Legal Metrology, Perumbavoor alleging offences punishable under Sections 18, 45, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 and 56 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985, Rule 24 of the Standards of Weights and Measures(Enforcement) Rules, 1992 and Rule 39 of the Standards of Weights and Measures(Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977. On an earlier occasion, the Inspector of LegalMetrology filed a compliant against petitioners 1 and 2 for the same offences on the basis of the very same facts and that was taken on file by the learned Magistrate asC.C.No. 1132 of 1997. In the course of trial of the above case, a petition was filed forwithdrawal of the complaint and the court acquitte...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnakumar Menon Vs. Neoteric Informatique (P) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-20-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ706
ORDERKoshy, J.1. An important question of law regarding jurisdiction of this Court was referred to the Division Bench by a Learned Single Judge(Justice N. Krishnan Nair) after noticing contrary views expressed by this Court in Sreethara Kamath v. Jawala Prasad Guptha (1970 KLT 45) and Chellappan v. Chandulal (1980 KLT 411) on one side and J.C. Augustine v. Omprakash Nanakram (2001(2) KLT 638 = 2001 (2) KLJ 57) on the other side. The common question arising for consideration in these cases is whether this Court can quash a criminal complaint pending in a court outside the Kerala State in a petition filed under S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?2. As far as the facts of these cases are concerned, petitioner is the partner of a firm named 'Online Instruments' functioning in Kochi. Various complaints were filed before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate's Court, Mumbai under Section 138 read with Section 141 & 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner, th...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Vs. Ramachandran
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-19-2001
Reported in: 2002ACJ441
R. Rajendra Babu, J.1. New India Insurance Co., the 3rd respondent in O.P. 1952/92 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palkkad, has come up in appeal, challenging the award of compensation by the above Tribunal. Sreekala, a girl aged 17 years, sustained injuries in a motor traffic accident on 28.4.1992 while she was travelling in a bus bearing No. KLG 8180. The lorry bearing No. KLG 1240 hit against the above bus and thus Sreekala sustained injuries and later succumbed to the injuries. The parents and the brother of the deceased (respondent 1 to 3 herein) approached the Tribunal making a claim of compensation of Rs. 7,54,000/- from the driver, owner and the insurer of both the vehicles. The appellant was the insurer of the offending vehicle, the lorry. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence, awarded a total compensation of Rs. 4,04,072/- with interest at 12% from the date of petition. It was further held that the appellant, the insurer of the offending vehicle viz., the l...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K. Suresh Kumar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-19-2001
Reported in: [2002]253ITR640(Ker)
P.K. Balasubramanyan, J.1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-I, Trivandrum. The appeal arose from the proceeding for imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. For the year 1987-88, the asses-see, an individual deriving income from abkari business, filed a return admitting a total income of Rs. 82,000 including the income of Rs. 75,000 as estimated from abkari business. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act on a total income of Rs. 1,52,950 including an addition of Rs. 94,000 as income from other sources on the basis of the increase in the net wealth as could be gathered from wealth-tax statements furnished by the assessec. The Assessing Officer treated this Rs. 94,000 as income and completed the assessment on that basis. The assessee did not challenge the addition. The Assessing Officer, during the course of the assessment, initiated penalty proceedings under ...
Tag this Judgment!Dy. Cit Vs. K. Suresh Kumar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-19-2001
Reported in: (2002)172CTR(Ker)375
P.K. Balasurbamanyan, J.This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act is by the Deputy Commissioner, Circle I, Trivandrum. The appeal arose from the proceeding for imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. For the year 1987-88, the assessee, an individual deriving income from abkari business, filed a return admitting a total income of Rs. 82,000 including the income of Rs. 75,000 as estimated from abkari business. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on a total income of Rs. 1,52,950 including an addition of Rs. 94,000 as income from other sources on the basis of the increase in the net wealth as could be gathered from wealth-tax statements furnished by the assessee. The assessing officer treated this Rs. 94,000 as income and completed the assessment on that basis. The assessee did not challenge the addition. The assessing officer during the course of the assessment, initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the A...
Tag this Judgment!District Registrar Vs. Lake Paradise
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-18-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Ker105
R. Bhaskaran, J.1. These appeals are filed against the judgment of the District Judge, Ernakulam, against an order passed under S. 45(B) of the Kerala Stamp Act. The delay of more than 556 days in filing the appeals was already condoned. The order passed by the District Registrar shows that it is a printed order in all the cases filling up the figures only and without giving any reason for demanding enhanced stamp duty on the documents executed by the respondent herein. It is also stated in that order that the respondent should pay the deficit stamp duty within 15 days of receipt of the order. The District Court has allowed the appeals holding that it is the consideration which was passed between the parties that is relevant for fixing the stamp duty and it is not the market value of the property that is to be taken into account under S. 45 of the Act.2. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the State submitted that the appeal was decide without hearing the respondent and there ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. Arun Valenchery
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-18-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ2512
J.B. Koshy, J.1. This case was referred to us by a learned Single Judge of this Court regarding the interpretation of Section 293 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in State of Rajasthan v. Doulat Ram (AIR 1980 SC 1314). We will deal with the referred question after considering the facts and merits of the case.2. The State questions the acquittal of the accused in C.C. NO. 39 of the 1997, who was charge sheeted for offence punishable under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short 'NDPS Act'). The accused in the case was a practicing lawyer and was a junior to Advocate Sri. V.V.N. Menon whose office was housed at the relevant time in room No. 301 of Queen Mary Hotel, Ernakulam, which was adjacent to the High Court. According to the prosecution the accused was found in unauthorised possession of Buprenorphine Tidigesic injection ampoules 97 in number in 2ml. ampoules at about 6.30 p.m. on 6.10.1996 in room N o. ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »