Kerala Court January 2004 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.
Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: [2006]144STC409(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The scope and ambit of the expressions 'have taken effective steps for setting up new industrial unit' occurring in Sub-clause (ii), Clause 1 of Notification S.R.O. No. 1092 of 1999 modifying the exemptions granted in Clauses 1 to 7 of Notification S.R.O. No. 1729 of 1993, both issued by the State Government under Section 10 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (for short, 'the Act') calls for consideration in this original petition.2. Pepsi Cola India Manufacturing Company, a private company with unlimited liability, had set up an industrial unit by investing approximately Rs. 50 crores at the Industrial Development Area at Kanjikode in Palakkad District and had commenced commercial production of soft drinks, etc., on March 6th/7th, 2001. The company made an application on June 20, 2001 (exhibit P8) for sales tax exemption to the tune of Rs. 43.32 crores under Notification S.R.O. No. 1729 of 1993 before the Director of Industries and Commerce, Thiruvananthapura...
John Roji Vs. Marriage Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-05-2004
Reported in: I(2005)DMC320; 2004(1)KLT687
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioners are married according to Church ceremony. However, certificate from Church is not valid for the purpose of visa. Therefore, the petitioners applied for registration of marriage under the Special Marriage Act. However, the respondent will issue certificate only after the statutory notice period is over and after registering the marriage. The prayer is for a direction to dispense with statutory notice and to issue the certificate.In view of the urgency pointed out by the petitioners for certificate and in view of the fact that petitioners are married in the Church and since Church conducts marriage only after proper scrutiny, I direct the respondent to take sworn statements from the petitioners, register the marriage and issue certificate to the petitioners within a week from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the petitioners. The petitioners will appear before the respondent and comply with the formalities. It will be open to ...
Leela Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-05-2004
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR207]; 2004(2)KLT220; (2004)IIILLJ106Ker
Jawahar Lal Gupta, C. J.1. Does Section 66(1)(b) of the Factories Act, 1948 discriminate against women or does it embody a special provision in their favour? This is the short question that arises for consideration in these four writ petitions. Learned Counsel for the parties have referred to the facts as averred in O.P.No. 16017/1997. These may be briefly noticed.2. The petitioner was appointed as a Binding Assistant with the Kerala Books and Publications Society on October 17, 1978. In the year 1982, the Society circulated a seniority list. The petitioner approached this Court through a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution with the grievance that the seniority had not been correctly fixed. This petition was registered as O.P. No. 7510/1982. It was disposed of with a direction that the petitioner may file a representation. She did so. Thereafter, she was promoted to the post of Machine Operator on December 2, 1982.3. On June 20, 1997, Mr. K. Prabhakaran Pillai, the third res...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›