Kerala Court May 2003 Judgments
Muhammed Vs. Devassia
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-23-2003
Reported in: III(2003)ACC475; I(2004)ACC120; 2004ACJ1341; AIR2003Ker354; 2003(2)KLT1068
R. Rajendra Babu, J.1. The appellant, K.P. Muhammed, aged 48 years, sustained certain injuries in a motor traffic accident occurred on 20.6.1998 which he was riding on his motor cycle bearing No.KLW 918. It was alleged that the jeep bearing No.KL-12/A-1710 owned by the 2nd respondent and driven by the 1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner hit against the motorcycle and thereby the appellant fell down and sustained injuries. The Kalpetta Police registered Crime 141/1998 against the 1st respondent alleging the commission of offences under Sections 279 and 337 IPC. The appellant filed O.P. (MV) 327/98 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Wayanad, claiming a total compensation of Rs. 1 lakh. Thereafter he filed I.A. 1214/01 claiming interim award of Rs. 25,000/- under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the above claim was disallowed. 'Aggrieved by the above order, the petitioner has' come up in appeal.2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.3. The main argument ad...
Tag this Judgment!Anas Abdul Khader Vs. Food Inspector
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-23-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1075; 2003(3)KLT1072
R. 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 offeree 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. 1 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 draw ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Asian Techs Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-23-2003
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(Ker)321
G. SIVARAJAN, J. 1. In IT Ref. No. 24 of 1998, the following question of law is referred to this Court at the instance of the Revenue for decision:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding:(i) the assessee is an industrial undertaking?(ii) the assessee is entitled to get deduction under Sections 80HH and 80-I in respect of profits referable to manufacture of any article or product or thing in the course of its construction activities and are not the above finding and decision wrong and unreasonable ?'2. In IT Ref. Nos. 187 & 188 of 1999, the following two questions of law are referred to this Court at the instance of the assessee :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that though the assessee is an industrial undertaking, it is not entitled to the deduction under Sections 80HH and 80-I of the Act?(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,...
Tag this Judgment!Mercy John Vs. Thankam
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-22-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)KLT798
R. Rajendra Babu, J.1. The important question for consideration was whether a teacher of an aided school managed by the Panchayat was disqualified under Section 30(1) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act from contesting the election for being chosen to fill a seat in the Panchayat.2. The short facts are as follows: The 1st respondent Thankam was working as a teacher of Alagappanagar Panchayat High School and she filed the nomination for contesting the election to the Thrissur District Panchayat held on 25.9.2000 from Kodakara Constituency and she was declared elected. The appellant and the 2nd respondent were also candidates who contested for the election. The appellant raised a contention that the 1st respondent, being a teacher of the school managed by the Panchayat, was disqualified from contesting the election in view of Section 30(1) of the Panchayat Raj Act. It was further contended that the 1st respondent was the Implementation Officer of the Education Department of People's Planning...
Tag this Judgment!Amway India Enterprises Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-22-2003
Reported in: (2003)182CTR(Ker)297
P.R. Raman, J.1. Petitioner is a private limited company with unlimited liability engaged in the business of direct selling of principally fast-moving consumer goods. Its registered office is at New Delhi. It started commercial operation in May, 1998. The first respondent is the Union of India and the second respondent is the Dy. Director of Income-tax (Inv.) II, Ernakulam South, Cochin. Petitioner seeks to issue a writ of cartiorari calling for the records and proceedings leading to Exts. P3 and P6 summons as modified by Ext. P8 letter, dt. 10th Aug., 2001, and to quash the same and for a direction to the second respondent to forbear from taking any further steps pursuant to Exts. P8 and for other reliefs.2. Ext. P1 is a letter dt. 6th June, 2001, issued by the second respondent to the managing director of the petitioner M/s Amway India Enterprises, New Delhi, as per which petitioner was requested to furnish the true and complete details of all payments made by them to their distribut...
Tag this Judgment!Lord Krishna Bank Ltd. Vs. the Express (Malayalam) Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-22-2003
Reported in: III(2003)BC221; [2005]125CompCas655(Ker); 2003(2)KLT831; [2005]64SCL542(Ker)
R. Rajendra Babu, J. 1. The Lord Krishna Bank Ltd., Indian Express Building, Kaloor, Cochin filed C.P. 25/94 for winding up of the company, The Express (Malayalam) Pvt. Ltd., alleging that the respondent company was incapable of paying off its debt and the liabilities of the company were far in excess of the assets and it had become commercially insolvent and incapable of repaying the amount. According to the allegations in the above petition, the company had a paid up capital of Rs. 30 lakhs and as on 31.3.1994 the company had to pay nearly Rs. 49 lakhs to the petitioner bank as the bank had accorded overdraft facilities, cash credit facilities and loans to the company. It was further alleged that there were several other creditors and other liabilities for the respondent company and because of the huge liabilities the substratum of the company had completely been vanished and the company was incapable of paying off its debts. Hence the company has to be wound up under Section 433(e) ...
Tag this Judgment!Nazar Vs. Varghese
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-22-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3622; 2003(2)KLT1002
ORDERK.A. Mohamed Shafi, J.1. The 1st respondent in Crl.M.C. 3682/1997 has filed this petition under Section 482 of the CrlP.C. to set aside the order dated 30.6.1999 passed by this Court in the Crl.M.C. and to rehear and dispose of the Crl M.C. on merits after affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard.2. Crl.M.C. 3682/97 was filed by the 1st respondent herein to quash Annexure-A3 complaint filed by the 1st respondent - petitioner herein alleging offences punishable under Sections 378, 379 and 420 of the IPC before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam. This Court by the considered order dated 30.6.1999 allowed the Crl.M.C. and quashed Annexure-A3 complaint and the entire proceedings taken by the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam against the petitioner therein.3. It is seen from the order passed by this Court in that Crl.M.C. that the petitioner herein did not appear before the Court in spite of the fact that he was personally se...
Tag this Judgment!Abraham Kuriakose and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-22-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Ker263
K.A. Mohamed Shafi, J. 1. These appeals are preferred against the judgments passed by the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kottayam in LAR Nos. 115, 103, 81. 117, 79 and 119/1993 respectively. All these references were made before the lower Court under Section 28-A(3) of the Land Acquisition Act. The lower Court answered all the references in the negative against the respective claimants. Hence the claimants have preferred these appeals before this Court challenging the respective judgments. 2. Since common questions are involved in these appeals, these appeals are heard and disposed of by this common judgment. 3. In LAR 115/93, 24.06 Ares of dry land comprised in Sy. No. 566/4 of Velloor Village was acquired as per the notification issued under Section 3(1) of the Kerala Land Acquisition Act on 17-7-1973 for the purpose of Kerala Newsprint Project. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded land value at the rate of Rs. 50/- per cent. 4. In LAR 103/93, 1.82 Ares of dry land belonging to the claim...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mahavir Plantations Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-22-2003
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(Ker)518; [2004]269ITR552(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, has referred the following question of law, for decision by this court at the instance of the Revenue, pursuant to the direction issued by this court in O. P. No. 2033 of 1996.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the tea development allowance under Section 33AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, must be in relation to the income of the business of growing and manufacturing tea, rather than to the taxable portion of such income ?'2. The brief facts necessary for decision of the above question are as follows. The respondent-assessee is a limited company engaged in the cultivation and manufacture of tea. During the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1986-87, the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs. 18 lakhs under Section 33AB(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for short 'the Act', and claimed the entire deposit as deduction. The Assessing Officer wh...
Tag this Judgment!Alleppey Prince Hotel Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-22-2003
Reported in: [2006]146STC251(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1.In matter arises under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act'). The same assessee is the revision petitioner in all these three cases. The State is the respondent in all these cases. The assessment year concerned in T.R.C. No. 294 of 2001 is 1985-86, in T.R.C. No. 296 of 2001 is 1987-88 and in T.R.C. No. 297 of 2001 is 1986-87.2. The petitioner is running a bar attached hotel in the name 'Alleppey Prince Hotel' at Alappuzha, The petitioner filed returns under the Act for the aforesaid three years, claiming exemption in respect of the entire turnover, representing cooked food and second sale of foreign liquor, except for the year 1987-88, during which period foreign liquor was taxable at two points. The assessing authority did not accept the books of accounts and the returns for the said three years on account of certain discrepancies and irregularities found on the basis of materials gathered in the inspection. The books of accounts for the three ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »