Kerala Court November 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.
Varkey Jacob Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-26-2004
Reported in: (2005)196CTR(Ker)391; [2005]275ITR146(Ker); 2005(2)KLT140
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Whether proceedings for imposing tax or reopening assessment for assessment years which have attained finality under existing law due to bar of limitation can be revived by the amendment of law which has no express provision of retrospective effect is the question to be considered in this case. Senior advocate Sri. V. Ramachandran appeared for the appellant and Sri. P.K. Ravindranatha Menon, senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department appeared for the respondents. Appellant/petitioner is an unregistered firm and was a lessee of a rubber estate called 'Velanikkara Estate' which was acquired by the Government for establishing Agricultural University. The Government took possession of the estate in 1973 and determined the compensation in March, 1974. Being a lessee of the land, petitioner's share was assessed as Rs. 9,58,192/-. Not being satisfied, the matter was taken for reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and finally this Court by judgment ...
Sivadasan Vs. State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-26-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)KLT225
ORDERK. Thankappan, J.1. The revision petitioners are members of the Railway Protection Force working in the Railway Police Station, Shornur. They seek to set aside the order dated 31.1.1995 in C.C.No. 150 of 1994 and to discharge them under Section 239 Cr.P.C.2. The revision petitioners were made accused in C.C.No. 150 of 1994 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ottapalam on the basis of a complaint filed by one C. Radhakrishnan (CW1). The allegation against them is that they committed offences punishable under Section 392 read with Section 34 IPC. The prosecution case was that on 12.3.1994 at about 9.95 hours the revision petitioners assaulted CW.1 and snatched away his ticket and a sum of Rs. 1500/- and thereby committed the above mentioned offence. After investigation, the Sub Inspector of Police attached to the Railway Station, Shornur laid the charge sheet. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the charge and proceeded against the revision petitioners....
State of Kerala Vs. Mariyamma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-26-2004
Reported in: [2005]144TAXMAN744(Ker)
ORDERK. Padmanabhan Nair, J.State, the judgment debtor in EP 242 of 1994 in LAR No. 120 of 1993 on the file of the Subordinate Judges Court, Thiruvananthapuram, is the revision petitioner.2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging an order passed by the executing court proclaiming 50 cents of property comprised in Survey No. 874/B of Thycaud Village, wherein the Government Rest House situate for sale in public auction. 1 hectare and 11.28 ares of dry land comprised in Survey No. 303/25 of Kazhakkuttam Menamkulam Village, was acquired for a public purpose by the appellant. A notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 14-5-1985. The award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 31-3-1986. The land was taken possession on 4-2-1986. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at Rs. 2,340 per are. On a request made by the decree holder, the Land Acquisition Officer referred the matter to the Subordinate Judges Court, Thiruvananthapuram, ...
Hamsa Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)KLT887
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. Assessee is the revision petitioner. Assessment year is 1999-2000. The petitioner is a dealer in marble at Kottancherry, Kanhangad, Kasaragod District. He filed returns conceding a total turnover of Rs. 18,79,357.99 and claimed exemption for Rs. 10,18,943.75 being second sales for the years 1999-2000. The petitioner's assessment for the year 1999-2000 was completed to the best of judgment fixing a taxable turnover of Rs. 24,09,680/-. The petitioner's claim for exemption being second sales was also rejected. It was submitted that there was no sufficient materials before the Assessing Authority warranting rejection of books of accounts and resorting to best judgment assessment.2. The petitioner mainly contended before the Assessing Officer that the return was not correct. The Assessing Authority has relied on the report of the I.O.B. and further it also referred to the files of Mahamaya Traders from whom the tiles were purchased by the petitioner. The petitioner co...
Umesh Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)KLT493
ORDERJ.M. James, J.1. The petitioner is C.W.9 in S.C. No. 346/2001 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Payyannur. The offences alleged against the 2nd accused in other cases are under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The offences alleged against the 14th accused are under Sections 143, 147, 148 and 307 read with Section 149 of IPC. The case came up for examination of the witnesses before the Court. But the learned Assistant Sessions Judge did not examine the witness and repeatedly adjourned the case, because of it the petitioner would find difficulty in attending the Court and also going for other engagements. Hence he came up before this Court by filing this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying that a direction may be given to the Court below to examine him in the case, at the earliest, in any event, on 30.11.2004 when the case is posted for trial.2. Annexure-A is true copy of the docket sheet produced by the petitioner. It shows that the petit...
K.S.R.T.C. vs. R.T.a.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)KLT217
K.M. Joseph, J.1. The Writ Petitioner, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation challenges Ext.P3. The complaint of the petitioner is directed against Ext.P4 by which the Regional Transport Authority, Kollam has granted renewal of regular permit on the route (inter-district) Kilimanoor Market Junction-- Kollam Andamukkom Private bus stand. According to the petitioner the grant of said permit cannot be countenanced in view of the fact that the said permit is against Ext.P2 approved scheme. The petitioner filed Ext.Pl objections against the grant of the renewal, but, it was, according to the petitioner, illegally overlooking the valid objections raised therein that the impugned decision has been taken. Ext.P2 scheme is dated 12.9.1961. Schedule I of the said scheme reads as follows:'Routes as indicated in Annexure A and all routes connecting or passing through any two or more intermediate points of such routes'.The scheme is Trivandrum-Quilon-Kottarakkara-Trivandrum (Circular). The compla...
Sreekumar Vs. Travancore Devaswom Board
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-24-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)KLT43
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. Both these Writ Petitions have been filed to bring to the notice of this Court that an elephant by name Manikantan, which was offered to Sree Vallabha Temple, Thiruvalla was dead. According to the petitioners, the elephant died because no proper care was taken and that the elephant was not properly treated for the disease. Since the petitioners proved a prima facie case, we appointed Sri. D. Sreevallabhan, Addl. District Judge, Pathanamthitta to enquire into the matter and file a report to this Court. Accordingly, he enquired into the matter and filed an enquiry report in two volumes. The first volume contains the report and the second volume contains depositions and documents.2. In the report at page 39, it is stated as follows: 'Hence, it is clear that there was laches on the part of EW 7 Sub Group Officer, EW9 Assistant Devaswom Commissioner and EW1 mahout in getting medical aid for the elephant at the proper time. At page 47, it is stated as follows: 'Hence n...
Joy Varghese Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-24-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Ker49; 2005(1)KLT24
ORDERPius C. Kuriakose, J.1. A learned Judge of this Court (K.A.Mohammed Shafi, J.) dismissed the appeal L.A.A. No. 788 of 1999 filed by the petitioner observing that the appellant has not produced any evidence to establish that the properties comprised in Exts.A1 and A2 (two items of evidence relied on by the appellant) are similar and similarly situated or comparable to the property acquired in the appellant's case. The appellant filed Review Petition No. 593 of 2003 complaining that there was evidence enough on record to show that the appellant's properties were comparable and similar to the properties comprised in Exts.A1 and A2 and therefore the judgment passed by K.A. Mohammed Shafi, J. is vitiated by errors apparent on the face of the record. The Review Petition was considered by another learned Judge of this Court (A. Lekshmikutty, J.) who not only admitted the Review Petition but also allowed the same holding that there was evidence on record to hold that the appellant's prope...
Rajesh P.S. Vs. Aluva Municipality and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-24-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Ker56; 2005(1)CTLJ427(Ker)
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The only question that has come up for consideration in this case is whether the Municipal Council has followed the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 347(20) (a) and (b) of the Kerala Municipalities Act, 1960, as amended by the Municipalities Act 1994.2. The Alwaye Municipal Council published Ext. P1 tender notice dated 13-7-2004 for auctioning the right to collect fee for bringing ice blocks into the market for sales. Municipal Council has fixed fee for exposing ice blocks in the market and its sale at the rate of Rs. 5/- and published the same. On the basis of Ext. P1 tender notice second respondent quoted ah amount of Rs. 73,000/- and the right to collect fee was awarded to him. Second respondent had paid one third of the amount and executed the agreement with the Municipality. Period of the licence is from 15-8-2004 to 31-32005.3. Writ petitioner is a dealer enaged in the business, of selling ice to fish vendors of the market in Alwaye. According...
Pappinissery Visha Chikilsa Society Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-24-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Ker109; 2005(1)KLT542
K. Thankappan, J.1. Petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The petitioner society has established a snake park in 1980 in Parassinikkadavu for treatment purposes and to educate people about the reptiles, birds etc. Considering the educational and charitable purpose, the 2nd respondent Panchayat had exempted the petitioner society from payment of show tax/entertainment tax. By Ext.Pl letter the 3rd respondent Panchayat informed the petitioner that the Panchayat had withdrawn the exemption of tax granted and decided to impose a tax from 1.8.1996 along with a surcharge. Against the action of the Panchayat in withdrawing the exemption of tax and reimposing the tax, the petitioner society filed Ext.P4 appeal before the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent, as per the direction in O.P.No. 16234/96 filed by the petitioner society, after considering the appeal dismissed the appeal by Ext.P5 stating that the decision of the Panchayat was sustainable in law....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »