Kerala Court September 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.
Krishnan Sreemathy Vs. Padmanabhan Gangadharan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-22-2004
Reported in: III(2005)ACC410; 2005(2)KLT691
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Appellants in this case are the unfortunate legal representatives (widow and three minor children) of one deceased Sivadasan. He was employed as a lorry attender by the first respondent (very same person was arrayed as first and second respondents, one as owner and second as driver). He died during the pendency of the appeal and his legal representatives are impleaded as additional respondents 5 and 6. On 28.8.1983, at about 12.15 p.m., owner of the goods vehicle bearing Registration No. KLQ 6855 took the lorry with the intention of killing another person. But, it accidentally hit Sivadasan, who was standing in the road side of a petrol bunk. He was taken to the hospital, but on the way to the hospital, he died. It is stated that at the time of' accident, he was aged 48 years and his monthly salary was Rs. 900 per month. The allegation in the application was that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver-cum-owner of the lorry.2. The first respondent ad...
M. Subramanian and ors. Vs. Devicolam Taluk Plantation Workers Co-oper ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-22-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Ker81
Cyriac Joseph, J.1. The appellants are the petitioners in W.P. (C) No. 24978/ 2004 which was dismissed by the learned single Judge.2. The appellants are members of the Devicolam Taluk Plantation Workers Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. No. K. 382 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society'). As per Ext. P1 notification dated 28-7-2004 a meeting of the General Body of the Society was convened on 29-8-2004 to elect a new Managing Committee. The schedule for the election also was contained in Ext. P1 notification. The last date for receipt of nomination papers was 17-8-2004. The date of scrutiny of nomination papers was 18-8-2004. The last date for withdrawal of nomination paper was 19-8-2004. Petitioners 1 and 2, and respondents 4 and 11 were among the persons who submitted nomination papers. On the date of scrutiny of the nomination papers the petitioners objected to the candidature of respondents 4 and 11 on the ground that they were disqualified for being elected as members of the Managi...
Kunchu Vs. Janaki
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-20-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Ker191; 2004(3)KLT878
ORDERP.R. Raman, J. 1. Plaintiffs in a suit O.S. No. 71/96 on the file of the Munsiff s Court, Parappanangadi are the revision petitioners. They laid the suit seeking a declaration that an assignment deed and a purchase certificate were obtained by the defendants fraudulently, without notice and in derogation of the specific legal provisions. As such the said documents are void ab initio and not binding on the plaint schedule property. They also sought for other consequential reliefs. They paid the court fee under Section 25(b) of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act. The defendants raised an objection regarding the valuation and also the court fee paid thereon. Since the Court below did not decide this question as a preliminary objection, the defendants preferred C.R.P. No. 130/2001 which was disposed of by order dated 12.1.2001. The operative portion of the order is extracted in paragraph 8 of the order impugned in this revision. Thereafter, the Court below raised specific i...
C.B.i. Vs. Babu
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-20-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ29; 2004(3)KLT624
ORDERK.A. Abdul Gafoor, J.1. This is a petition to condone the delay of 187 days in filing the appeal. While opposing the delay petition the competence of counsel, who presented the Memorandum of Appeal, to prefer the appeal against the acquittal is also seriously questioned. Therefore, that aspect has to be considered.2. It is contended by Sri. S. Vijayakumar that the counsel who presented the Memorandum of Appeal under Section 378(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure did not have the competence to do, as he had not been appointed as Public Prosecutor in terms of Section 24 of the Code nor has he been directed by the Public Prosecutor to prefer such an appeal. A person shall be appointed as Public Prosecutor as per Section 24 of the Code. In terms of the definition of the word 'public prosecutor' as contained in Section 2(u) of the Code, the Public Prosecutor will include any other person acting under directions of a public prosecutor. So either the public prosecutor himself or any on...
Chandrakala Vs. Soman
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-17-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)KLT432
ORDERK.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. This Court in Paul v. Saleena, 2004 (1) KLT 924 held that unregistered lease deeds cannot be pressed into service to create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish any right title or interest in or to the property comprised in the document. In the instant case an unregistered lease deed was executed between the parties on 15.12.1992 leasing out the tenanted premises for a period of two years on a monthly rent of Rs. 450/-. The lease deed contained a clause whereby the rent can be revised after the expiry of two years on mutually agreed terms and if the terms cannot be mutually agreed, the rent will be increased by 25% at the end of the cycle of every two years. Landlady took up the stand that the tenant is legally obliged to pay monthly rent at the rate of Rs. 562.50 from 16.12.1994. In spite of repeated demands the tenant failed to pay rent from 1.1.1995. Registered notice dated 1-6.6.1995. was issued by the landlady to the tenant demanding the arrears of r...
English Indian Clays Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-17-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)KLT901
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The petitioner is an assessee to sales tax both under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and under the Central Sales Tax Act. The question involved in this Writ Petition is as to whether penal interest Under Section 23(3) of the KGST Act can be imposed in respect of delayed payment of Central Sales Tax due under the said Act. According to the petitioner, Section 9(2) of the CST Act did not provide for levy of penal interest provided under Section 23(3) of the KGST Act for delayed payment of Central Sales Tax. Whereas according to the respondents, by virtue of the provision of Section 9(2) of the CST Act, all the provisions of the KGST Act in regard to assessment and recovery of penal interest, etc. will automatically apply.2. In this case, the petitioner has challenged Exts.P2, P4 and P5 assessment proceedings under the CST Act to the extent of the interest levied therein by invoking the provision of Section 23(3) of the KGST Act. The petitioner has also sought for a d...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. P.K. Narayanan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-17-2004
Reported in: (2004)192CTR(Ker)226
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. These references arise from the order of the Tribunal, Cochin Bench in ITA Nos. 868 & 610/Coch/1990-91. Assessment years are 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1988-89. The facts of the case are as follows :2. Assessee is a partner in certain partnership firms. The dispute which was taken before the Tribunal is regarding the inclusion of income derived from the business of M/s Archana Jewellery in the hands of the assessee. According to the Revenue, the business of M/s Archana Jewellery was ostensibly carried on by one A.N. Chellappan. But it was really the business of the assessee. This inference was drawn on the basis of certain materials seized in the course of a search under Section 132 of the IT Act in the premises of the assessee. Such a view had been held by the Revenue for and from the asst. yr. 1979-80. The Revenue drew support from the order of the Tribunal dt. 14th March, 1986 in the assessee's own case in which it was held that the assessee was the real owner of th...
Kerala Community Development Extension Officers Association Vs. State ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-17-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR275]; 2004(3)KLT940
K.K. Denesan, J.1. First petitioner is a recognised service organisation of employees working in the Kerala Community Development as Extension Officers. Petitioners 2 and 3 belong to the category of Extension Officers. Petitioner No. 4 belongs to the category of Village Extension Officer in the Community Development of Village Extension Officer in the Community Development Department. Respondents 3 to 9 who got themselves impleaded belong to the very same categories to which the petitioner belong. They support the petitioners and are interested in securing reliefs prayed for in this O.P.2. Petitioners have sought for a declaration that the Rule providing filling up of the posts of Block Development Officers (B.D.O's.) in the Community Development Department exceeding 20% of the total .sanctioned posts of B.D.O's by direct recruitment or transfer is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. They have also sought for the issuance of a direct...
Cit Vs. P.K. Narayanan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-17-2004
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN51(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J.These references arise from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in ITA Nos. 868,869 and 610 (Coch)/1990-91. Assessment years are 1986-87,1987-88 and 1988-89. The facts of the case are as follows :2. Assessee is a partner in certain partnership firms. The dispute which was taken before the Appellate Tribunal is regarding the inclusion of income derived from the business of M/s. Archana Jewellery in the hands of the assessee. According to the revenue, the business of M/s. Archana Jewellery was ostensibly carried on by one A.N. Chellappan. But it was really the business of the assessee. This inference was drawn on the basis of certain materials seized in the course of a search under section 132 of the Income Tax Act in the premises of the assessee. Such a view had been held by the revenue for and from the assessment year 1979-80. The revenue drew support from the order of the Tribunal dated 14-3-1986 in the assessees own case in which it was he...
Medical Accident Prevention Society Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-17-2004
Reported in: (2005)194CTR(Ker)475; [2005]278ITR165(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. The petitioner-society is one which is registered under the Travancore Cochin Literary and Scientific Charitable Societies Registration Act (XII of 1955) with registration No. 576/1994 granted by the Registrar of Society, Ernakulam. The memorandum of rules and bye-laws of the society contained in Ext. P8, was amended in the year 1998. According to the petitioner, the objects of the society as per the deed are charitable and that it is entitled to registration under Section 12A of the IT Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). The CIT by its order dt. 10th Aug., 1998, rejected the said application. The petitioner challenges the said order in this writ petition.2. Sri P. Balachandran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, took me to the deed (Ext. P8) and brought to my notice the preamble which contains the objects and submitted that the objects are purely charitable. Counsel further submitted that the CIT was carried away by the powers of the society and had mixed th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »