Kerala Court August 2003 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Chem Teak Company Vs. Additional Sales Tax Officer - Ii
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-01-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)KLT610; [2005]139STC168(Ker)
J.B. Koshy, J.1. The question to be decided in this appeal is whether chemically treated rubber wood is a commercially different product from the raw rubber wood and consequently whether production of chemically treated rubber wood can be treated as a manufacturing activity for claiming benefit under S.R.O. No. 1729/93, dated 1st January, 1994.2. The appellant is a manufacturer of chemically treated rubber wood. It is having a small scale industrial unit in the Industrial Estate and commenced its production from 29.5.1995. It purchases raw rubber wood from plantations and various sources and manufactures chemically treated rubber wood. Under S.R.O. No. 1729 of 1993 dated 1.1.1994, new industrial units are eligible to get sales tax exemption for a period of seven years in respect of tax payable by such units under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act on the turnover of sale of goods manufactured and sold by them within the State and on the turnover of goods taxable at the point of last purc...
Gouri Amma Krishnamma Vs. Seethalakshmi Amma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-01-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Ker75
A. Lekshmikutty, J.1. Plaintiff in O.S. No. 23 of 1993 on the file of the Munsiffs Court, Cherthala is the appellant herein. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration and injunction. The plaint item No. 1 property absolutely belongs to the plaintiff as per the decree in O.S. No. 315/72 and sale deed No. 2383/89. The plaintiff and her predecessors were enjoying the said property for the last 50 years. There is a residential building in item No. 1 property wherein the plaintiff and his family are residing. Plaint schedule item No. 2 belongs to defendants 1 to 5. The said property lies on the east of item No. 1. A portion of item No. 2 was sold to the 5th defendant and as such he is in possession of the said portion. On the eastern side of item No. 2, there is a public road which starts from Cherthala Government Girls High School Junction. The plaintiff and his predecessors in interest have been using the pathway through item No. 2 which is shown as item No. 3 for ingress and egrees to...
Mohandas Vs. Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-01-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ509; 2004(1)KLT873
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. These Original Petitions are filed by the members of the erstwhile Managing Committee of the Guruvayur Devaswom and the Commissioner and the previous Administrator of the Devaswom against the order passed by the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Trichur in C.M.P. No 559 of 2002. By this order, the court has directed vigilance enquiry and further action on Ext. P1 complaint. Ext. P1 complaint is filed by one Suresh alleging certain allegations against the previous members of the Managing Committee and against the Administrator and Commissioner. As soon as the complaint was received, the Special Judge called for the remarks from the Commissioner and thereafter the impugned order was passed.2. The complaint is filed under the Prevention of Corruption Act. It further states that the audit was not taking place due to the mismanagement of the members of the Managing Committee. The Enquiry Commissioner got details from the Commissioner of Guruvayur Devaswom and pa...
Madhavan Balasundaram and ors. Vs. Madhavan Sarasamma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-01-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Ker79
ORDERA. Lekshmikutty, J.1. The appellants are the review petitioners herein. Second appeal is filed by the appellants against the judgment and decree in A. S. No. 134/1983 on the file of the Sub-Court. Attingal, which was filed by the plaintiffs against the decree and Judgment in O.S. No. 44/1979 of the Munsiff Court, Varkala. The suit was filed by the plaintiff for declaration of title and possession over the plaint schedule property. The property was in the possession of a receiver appointed in O.S. No. 116 of 1969. As per the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs and the 6th defendant alone are the legal heirs of deceased Velayudhan Madhavan. Velayudhan - Madhavan married Kaliyamma Muthamma nearly 70 years ago and the plaintiffs and sixth defendant are the children of Madhavan and Muthamma. Madhavan died in 1968. After the death of Madhavan, his right over the property devolved on the plaintiffs and 6th defendant. Madhavan never married the first defendant and hence defendants 2 to 5 are not h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›