Kerala Court May 2003 Judgments
United Employees' Association Vs. Government of India and Ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-27-2003
Reported in: (2003)IIILLJ59Ker
R. Rajendra Babu, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4. 2. The petitioner, the United Employees Association, represented by its General Secretary, filed this O.P. for directing the 2nd respondent, the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Ernakulam, to conduct a referendum as requested in Ext.P1 at the earliest, Ext.P1 is a request made before the Assistant Labour Commissioner by the Cochin Steamer Agents' Association. The Cochin Steamer Agents' Association is an association registered under the Travancore-Cochin (Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies) Registration Act. The request made before the Assistant Labour Commissioner was to take steps to conduct a referendum so that the strength of each union under the USA Pool can be assessed. Ext.P1 request also would reveal that the request was made due to the compulsion or pressure exerted from the part of the petitioner union. The recital in Ext.P1 reads: '...
Tag this Judgment!Arunachalam Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-27-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3980
N. Krishnan Nair, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Kozhikode in S.C. No. 65/1999. The appellant was charged with the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the I.P.C. After the trial, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge found the appellant guilty of the offences and convicted him. He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302, I.P.C. No separate sentence was awarded under Section 201 of the I.P.C. The order of conviction and sentence passed against the appellant is seriously challenged in this appeal.2. The prosecution story runs in the following lines : The deceased-Uthifanam was the wife of the accused-Arunachalam. They were residing together in a shed located on the south of the compound wall of the X-ray shed attached to the T.P. Hospital in Cheruvannur. There were frequent skirmishes between the two. On the date of the occurrence i.e. on 4-10-1997 at about 10.15 p.m. there e...
Tag this Judgment!Sojan Francis Vs. M.G. University
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-26-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Ker290; 2003(2)KLT582
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. An important question of considerable public importance concerning the educational scenario in the State arises for consideration in this case. The question is whether an educational institution has got the freedom to prohibit political activities within the college campus and forbid the student from organising or attending meetings other than official ones within the college campus and whether such a restriction would violate Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India.2. Petitioner is a second year B. A. Degree student of St. Thomas College, Palai with politics as Main and History and Economics as subsidiaries. He is a College Union member and Editor of the College Magazine and Area Committee member of the Students Federation of India. Principal of the College refused to admit him for the second year B.A. Degree examination due to lack of attendance. Petitioner obtained an order from the Controller of Examinations to write the examination provi...
Tag this Judgment!Alias Vs. Paul
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-26-2003
Reported in: III(2003)ACC377; 2004ACJ158; AIR2004Ker214; 2003(2)KLT992
J.B. Koshy, J.1. These two appeals are filed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor in O.P. (MV) No. 981 of 1990. The above claim petition was filed by the father and mother of one Benny who died in a motor accident. The deceased Benny was an automobile mechanic and he was working in Janahitham Motor Workshop in Kuroor Kara owned by one Sri. K.P. Chinna Swamy. The owner of the vehicle in question who is the appellant in M.F. A. No. 641 of 1993 entrusted his vehicle to the workshop for building its body. On 2.3.1987 at about 12.30 p.m. while Benny was engaged in doing the work on the rear side of the lorry, another worker in the workshop took the lorry backwards without any warning and the lorry hit on the head of Benny. Thereafter, the lorry went further backwards and hit against the wall of the workshop and caused damages. Even though Benny was taken to the Government Hospital, he succumbed to the injuries. It was the contention that the deceased was 20 ...
Tag this Judgment!Travancore Devaswom Board Vs. Rajasekharan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-26-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)KLT882; (2004)ILLJ737Ker
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. Both these Writ Appeals are filed against the judgment of a learned single Judge in O.P. Nos. 27551 and 27889 of 2001. O.P. No. 27551 of 2001 was filed challenging Ext.P 19 order of the Travancore Devaswom Board directing the petitioner to remit the entire arrears of salary received by him, while he was out of service.2. So far as the other Original Petition is concerned, it was filed by one P.C. Vijayakumar, who was suspended from service along with the petitioner in the other Original Petition. Here also he challenges the order passed by the Travancore Devaswom Board to recover the arrears of salary. Facts in both these cases are as follows.3. Both the petitioners were working in the Travancore Devaswom Board. They were suspended pending disciplinary proceedings against them. The Enquiry Officer found that the allegations against the petitioners were proved. The Devaswom Board dismissed the petitioner in O.P. No. 27551 of 2001 while compulsory retired the petit...
Tag this Judgment!Hotel Whitelines Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-26-2003
Reported in: (2003)184CTR(Ker)190; [2004]266ITR481(Ker)
G. Swarajan, J.1. The matter arises under the IT Act, 1961, (for short 'the Act'). The assessee under the Act has filed this appeal against the order of the Tribunal in ITA 524/Coch/1995. The assessment year concerned is 1988-89. The only question involved in this appeal is regarding the valuation of the hotel building constructed by the assessee, over a period of eight years from 1983 to 1991. In the books of accounts maintained by the assessee the cost of construction of this building was shown at Rs. 39,78,765. The assessee had also obtained a valuation of this building by a registered valuer, who had estimated the cost of construction of this building with reference to PWD rate and, after taking into account the inflation, fixed the cost of construction of the building at Rs. 41,55,500. The AO was not prepared to accept the cost of construction furnished by the assessee. He, accordingly, referred the matter to the Departmental Valuer, who had adopted the plinth area method and esti...
Tag this Judgment!Sarojini Amma Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-26-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3323
K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J. 1. The appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused) is the accused in S. C. No. 81/2001 on the file of the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Kozhikode. She was charge sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the Code'). Learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant for both the offences and sentenced her to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- under Section 302 alone. No separate sentence was awarded for the offence stated to be proved under Section 498A of the Code. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred this appeal.2. The prosecution case is as follows : At about 7.45 P.M. on 6-2-1998, the accused, the mother-in-law of the deceased had thrown a lighted kerosene lamp against the deceased Gowri, her daughter-in-law. She sustained burn injuries. She was taken to the hospital. While under treatment, she died in the Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode on 17-...
Tag this Judgment!Western Indian Plywoods Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-26-2003
Reported in: (2004)IILLJ950Ker
J.B. Koshy, J.1. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act. One of the unions (2nd respondent herein) representing 344 workers raised an industrial dispute claiming that 344 workers were denied employment for the period from February 18, 1991 to July 6, 1991. It was a period of strike. According to Union 344 workmen represented by them did not participate in the strike and they were willing to work, but they were denied work, especially because of the striking workers. According to them, the management also did not give them any protection to do the work. The following issue was referred for adjudication before the Labour Court, Kannur.'Denial of employment to 344 workers for the period from February 18, 1991 to July 6, 1991.'2. The definite case of the workers is that they were denied employment from February 18, 1991 to July 6, 1991. Since the denial of employment was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication, a claim statement was filed by the union claiming...
Tag this Judgment!Hotel Whitelines Vs. Cit
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-26-2003
Reported in: [2003]131TAXMAN320(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.The matter arises under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The assessee under the Act has filed this appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA. 524 (Coch)/1995. The assessment year concerned is 1988-89. The only question involved in this appeal is regarding the valuation of the hotel building constructed by the assessee, over a period of eight years from 1983 to 1991. In the books of account maintained by the assessee the cost of construction of this building was shown at Rs. 39,78,765. The assessee had also obtained a valuation of this building by a registered valuer, who had estimated the cost of construction of this building with reference to PWD rate and, after taking into account the inflation, fixed the cost of construction of the building at Rs. 41,55,500. The assessing officer was not prepared to accept the cost of construction furnished by the assessee. He, accordingly, referred the matter to the department...
Tag this Judgment!Nabeesa Mundoli Vs. Food Inspector
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-23-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)KLT718
ORDERR. Basant, J. 1. Aggrieved by the verdit of guilty, conviction and sentence under Section 16(1)(a)(i) and Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, the petitioners (accused 1 and 2) have preferred these revision petitions.2. The prosecution alleged that accused No. 2 on behalf of accused No. 1, licensee of Sona Restaurant at Paramount Tower, Calicut had sold 750 ml of milk to the Food Inspector, PW.3, which, on analysis was found not to comply with the standards prescribed for buffalo's milk under the relevant Rules. It was alleged that thereby the accused had committed the offence alleged against them.3. The accused denied the offence alleged against them. Thereupon the prosecution examined PWs.1 to 4 and proved Exts.P1 to 5. PW.3 is the Food Inspector and PW.4 his Peon. The accused No. l took the stand that she had no connection with the establishment. Accused No. 2, inter alia, contended that there was no proper sampling. The Food Inspector had no jurisdiction to dr...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »