Kerala Court January 2002 Judgments
M. Mohamedkutty and Etc. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-22-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Ker39
ORDERR. Rajendra Babu, J.1. The Kunhimon Haji Memorial High School (KHMHS) at Alathiyur was established in 1974 by late Hamsa Haji, who died on 16-9-1993. He was the Individual Educational Agency and the Manger of the School. The fifth respondent Sainaba is the wife of iate Hamsa Haji. They had nine daughters and two sons. Petitioner Mohammedkutly is the eldest son and the younger son Moideenkutty, later died leaving his widow and three children. The KHMHS belonged to the deceased Harnsa Haji and the school was located in an area of 3.5 acres of land. In 1988 Hamsa Haji proceeded for Haj and during the period of his absence, he authorized the petitioner to be the Manager of the School and the DEO approved the petitioner as the temporary Manager as per Exhibit P2 proceedings. During May 1993 Hamsa Haji became ill and he authorised the petitioner to be the Manager of the School till Hamsa Haji recovers from his illeness the younger brother of the petitioner also had consented to the abov...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. Williams
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-18-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1984; 2002(82)ECC727
M.R. Hariharan Nair, J. 1. The question posed by the State in this State Appeal is whether the acquittal entered by the 1st Additional Sessions Court, Ernakulam, acting as a Special Court for trial of N.D.P.S. cases, acquitting the accused is justified and proper.2. The allegation was that pursuant to information received at 10.45 a.m. on 11.10.1994, PW.7, who was the Circle Inspector of Police, proceeded to the spot mentioned in the information viz., Njarakkal Market and found the accused there and on search of his body seized 75 grams of ganja.3. The trail court considered the acceptability of the prosecution case in the light of the evidence of PWs. 1 to 7, Exts. P 1 to P 10, D 1 to D 4 series and MOs 1 to 3 and found that there was no necessity to comply with Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act in view of the fact that the information received by PW.7 related to availability of contraband with a person standing in a public place; that in any case there is sufficient evidence for complia...
Tag this Judgment!Madhava Rao M. Vs. Appellate Authority (Executive Committee), State Ba ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-18-2002
Reported in: [2002(94)FLR1210]; (2002)IIILLJ975Ker
M. Ramachandran, J.1. While employed as a Manager in the State Bank of Travancore (hereinafter referred to as Bank) the petitioner, on June 21, 1990 had requested his employer to grant him leave for pursuing studies abroad. The application had been, forwarded to the competent authority duly recommended, but the request had been declined as shown by letter of the Zonal Manager dated August 1, 1990. The relevant circular provided that such requests were to be decided on individual basis, at the discretion of the Bank. Petitioner had requested that by way of an alternative leave on loss of pay may be sanctioned to him. The averments in the Original Petition show that on such appeal the Executive Committee had decided to reject the request. The petitioner had filed a representation to the Board of Directors Ext. P-7. It is gatherable that though leave had not been sanctioned, petitioner had proceeded to Canada, and had started receiving lessons, perhaps with the hope that he may be able to...
Tag this Judgment!Govinda Rao Vs. Food Inspector
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-17-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1796
ORDERG. Sasidharan, J.1. The first petitioner is the Managing Partner of M/s. B.G.R. Enterprises, apartnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act. The firm is carrying onthe business of catering food and beverages to different establishments. The firm isconducting a restaurant in M/s. Bharat (BTH), Durbar Hall Road, Ernakulam,Kochi, on contract basis. On 19.5.2000 the Food Inspector, Kochi inspected therestaurant of the petitioners and at that time the second petitioner was present in therestaurant. According to the petitioners, Food Inspector inspected the restaurant andkitchen and thereafter entered the store of the petitioners and took away some quantityof green gram and canned cherries. A debit note was prepared for the articles and areceipt was issued for the cash received from the Food Inspector. The Cherries werein sealed cans and Food Inspector took away three such cans.2. The food articles taken by the Food Inspector were sent for analysis to thePublic Analyst. T...
Tag this Judgment!Chandran K., Peon, Oorakam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Secretar ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-17-2002
Reported in: [2002(94)FLR847]; (2002)IIILLJ678Ker
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The point raised in both these cases are the same. Hence we are disposing of these by a common judgment. Question raised in this case is whether Government or Joint Registrar has got power to direct the Co-operative Bank to suspend its employee. Learned single Judge felt that when gross irregularities or misappropriation are found against employees it is always open to the Government or Joint Registrar to direct the society to suspend their employees. Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that learned single Judge was not justified in holding that Joint Registrar and Government have got power to issue such a direction. Learned Government Pleader could not point out any provision either in the Co-operative Societies Act or in the Rules empowering the Joint Registrar or State Government to direct a society to suspend its employees. Rule 198(6) of the Co- operative Rules authorises only the competent authority to suspend an employee pending enquiry. We may...
Tag this Judgment!E.S.i. Corporation Vs. Sasi
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-16-2002
Reported in: II(2003)ACC97; 2002ACJ2097; [2002(93)FLR501]
A. Lekshmikutty, J.1. Challenging the judgment in I.C. No. 75 of 1993 on the file of the Employees' Insurance Court, Alappuzha, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party. The respondent is an employee covered under the E.S.I. Act with insurance No. 54-1678138. The appellant received an accident report from the employer of the respondent reporting that on 21.11.1992 at 7.45 A.M. while the respondent was returning to his house after the right shift, he was assaulted by some persons near the bus stop adjacent to the factory. Investigation conducted by the appellant revealed that the respondent was assaulted by some one on account of person vengeance. The appellant sustained injury on his left hand and he claimed the benefits admissible for employment injury as defined under Section 2(8) of the E.S.I. Act. The employment injury is denied by the appellant. It was only an assault by a stranger out side the premises of the factory and not arose out of employment.2. The respondent challen...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Concert Investment and Leasing ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-16-2002
Reported in: [2002]123TAXMAN452(Ker)
V.P. Mohankumar, J.The question raised is whether the assessee who is engaged in the business of leasing, hire purchasing and financing of computers, etc., is entitled to claim benefit under section 32A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the decision in CIT v. First Leasing Co. of India Ltd. : [1995]216ITR455(Mad) , the Madras High Court held that the assessee has used the plant and machinery for its business of manufacture. In view of the said decision, the Tribunal decided against the revenue.2. In the decision in CIT v. Shaan Finance (P) Ltd. : [1998]231ITR308(SC) , the Supreme Court has overruled that decision of the madras High Court. As such, the question is answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.3. This income-tax reference is disposed of as above....
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. O.E.N. Connectors Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-16-2002
Reported in: [2002]123TAXMAN453(Ker)
V.P. Mohankumar, J.The question raised in these ITRs is whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the interest earned on short-term deposits of surplus funds is not revenue receipt and not taxable In view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT : [1997]227ITR172(SC) , the Supreme Court held that both deposit and interest are separately assessable and cannot be claimed by the assessee. The question is answered upholding the same. in view of the decision of the Supreme Court, the question is answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.2. These income-tax references are disposed of as above....
Tag this Judgment!Sasidharan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-15-2002
Reported in: [2001(88)FLR835]
K. Balakrishnan Nair, J.1. The petitioners are Armed Police Inspectors of Kerala Armed Police Ist Battalion, Thrissur. They have approached this Court challenging Ext. P6 order of the Government whereunder their claim for retrospective promotion to the post of Havildar has been rejected. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the case are the following:2. Kerala Armed Police Battalion I (KAPI) and Kerala Armed Police Battalion (KAPII) were formed as per the Government Orders dated 17.11.1972 and 6.10.1976. Prior to 17.11.1972, there were two Armed Police Battalion,s namely MSP and SAP. The non-gazetted posts in the MSP were governed by the Special Rules for MSP Subordinate Service and those in the SAP were governed by various executive orders. KAPI and II Battalions were separate units for the purpose of seniority and promotion. MSP and SAP were also separate units for the above said purpose. While so, the Government issued Special Rules on 18.1.1984 treating all the Police Batt...
Tag this Judgment!Peroorkada Service Co-operative Bank Vs. Sheena
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-15-2002
Reported in: [2002(95)FLR1137]; (2002)IIILLJ459Ker
M.R. Hariharan Nair, J.1. Can the termination of service of Clerks engaged on daily wages on completion of the particular work for which they were engaged in a Co-operative Bank be taken as 'retrenchment' justifying interference by the Labour Court? This is the main question that arises for decision in the present case.2. The 1st respondent herein was engaged by a Branch Manager of the petitioner - Bank (Peroorkada Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., Thiruvananthapuram) for casual works relating to audit and finalisation of annual accounts on daily wages for the period from 16.4.1986 till 27.6.86 and from 16.10.1987 to 13.3.1989. The 2nd respondent worked likewise during the period from 16.4.1986 to 5.7.1986 and from 16.10.1987 to 11.3.1989. They were not allowed to work for further periods. Aggrieved by the denial of work, they approached the Labour Court, Kollam and as per Ext. P4 award passed in I.D. No. 90/90 the Manager's contentions were turned down and it was directed that the said ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »