Kerala Court October 2005 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.
Gwalior Rayons Staff Association and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-17-2005
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(Ker)588
P.R. Raman, J.1. The first petitioner is the Gwalior Rayons Staff Association, represented by its joint secretary. Second petitioner is a member of staff as also a member of the first petitioner-association. The prayer made in this original petition is to declare that the provisions of Section 10(10)(iii) of the IT Act to the extent it has allowed exemption based on the method of calculation as illegal and discriminatory and for other consequential reliefs.2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are not governed by the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, in the matter of payment of gratuity; but are governed by the terms and conditions of the settlement between the employees and the management of Grassim Industries Ltd. It is the contention of the petitioners that as per the settlement between the parties, the employees will be entitled to gratuity at a rate higher than what is prescribed under the Payment of Gratuity Act. In the case of employees whose duration of service is between...
Jacob Simon Vs. Sales Tax Officer, N. Parur
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-17-2005
Reported in: (2007)7VST248(Ker)
P.R. Raman, J.1. Petitioner is an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. He is engaged in the manufacture of chemicals which is a small-scale industrial unit eligible for sales tax exemption as per the notification issued in this behalf. In the year 1994-95 petitioner purchased raw materials worth Rs. 3,21,145 from M/s. Industrial Chemical Corporation, Eda, Cochin as against form 18 declarations claiming concessional rate of tax under Section 5(3) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. The Sales Tax Officer, the respondent herein, however disallowed the claim of concessional rate of tax on the ground that no tax is paid by the petitioner on the finished products. Accordingly, a penalty of Rs. 44,960 was imposed on him under Section 45A(f) of the KGST Act for the alleged violation of the provisions under Section 5(3) of the KGST Act as per order dated February 12, 1999 as evidenced by exhibit P1. Besides imposition of penalty, by a separate order the differential rat...
Gwalior Rayons Staff Association and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-17-2005
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(Ker)589; [2006]282ITR141(Ker); [2006]152TAXMAN520(Ker)
P.R. Ramam J:The first petitioner is the Gwalior Rayons Staff Association, represented by its joint secretary. Second petitioner is a member of staff as also a member of the first petitioner-association. The prayer made in this original petition is to declare that the provisions of section 10(10)(iii) of the Income Tax Act to the extent it has allowed exemption based on the method of calculation as illegal and discriminatory and for other consequential reliefs.2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are not governed by the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, in the matter of payment of gratuity; but are governed by the terms and conditions of the settlement between the employees and the management of Grassim Industries Ltd. It is the contention of the petitioners that as per the settlement between the parties, the employees will be entitled to gratuity at a rate higher than what is prescribed under the Payment of Gratuity Act. In the case of employees whose duration of service is bet...
Santhakumari Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)KLT649
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. This matter has been placed before us on a reference by a learned single Judge of this Court in view of the conflicting views expressed by a learned single Judge of this Court in Rose v. State of Kerala : 2004(1)KLT934 and by another learned single Judge in Sivankutty Nair v. Secretary to Government : 2005(3)KLT512 .2. The question posed is whether Government is entitled to recover the amount paid to an employee on account of wrong fixation of pay in a case where employee has not contributed to the whole mistake. Learned judge in Rose's case, supra : 2004(1)KLT934 rejected the plea that the Government is disabled from demanding the over payments. Learned Judge held that if an officer is denied any benefits he has a right to insist for payment. Likewise, he owes a duty to pay back the excess received by him. The plea that amounts paid are appropriated and one may find it difficult to pay it back can only be a self serving argument and not equitable. We notice th...
Vijoy Vs. Director General, B.S.F.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-2005
Reported in: [2006(108)FLR482]; 2005(4)KLT919
Kurian Joseph, J.1. Petitioner is aggrieved since he is denied the disability pension. Disability to the extent of 60% is admitted. The petitioner also has been included in the medical category EEE and he is thus unfit for service under the respondents. Pension is refused on the ground that the disease suffered by the petitioner is not a scheduled one under the Schedule to the Central Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension) Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). That the personnel under the respondents are governed by the above mentioned Rules, is not disputed.2. Petitioner entered service of the Boarder Security Force as Constable (OPR) and joined duty on 26.4.1973. He was thereafter promoted as Naik (OPR), Head Constable (Cipher) and Assistant Sub Inspector (Cipher). While the petitioner was serving in Assam/West Bengal in 1984, he developed dandruff slowly and then some skin lesions causing itching which spread all over the body. He came to Delhi for Cipher Grade II Course. He...
State of Kerala Vs. Subbayyan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)KLT182
S. Siri Jagan, J.1. Appellants in this appeal are the State of Kerala and the Tahsildar, Kollam. They were the respondents in O.P. No. 27291/2000, the judgment in which is impugned in this appeal. They are aggrieved by the direction of the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment directing the 2nd appellant to issue a caste certificate to the daughter of the 1st respondent as belonging to Hindu-Pallan community, which is recognised as a scheduled caste in the State of Kerala and further to give financial assistance on the basis of such certificate. The situation culminating in the Original Petition arose in the following circumstances.2. The 1st respondent was originally a native of Palayamkottai Village in Dindigal Taluk in the State of Tamil Nadu. He belonged to the caste Hindu-Pallan. Hindu-Pallan caste of Tamil Nadu was recognised as a scheduled caste in that State as per the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950. Accordingly, he and his family were treated as scheduled c...
Siyad Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-13-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ671; 2005(4)KLT590
ORDERJ.B. Koshy, J. 1. Doubting the correctness of the decision of the Division Bench in Shaji v. Kerala State : 2004(3)KLT270 in view of the two earlier judgments of the Apex Court, this Bail Application was referred to the Division Bench. Petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No. 18/2004 of Railway Police Station, Shornur. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with another accused was found to be in possession of 3200 ampules of Norphine (Buprenorphine Hydrochloride) and 60 Ampules Ophenorgon. Petitioner was arrested on 25-6-2005. According to the counsel for the petitioner, he was in custody for about 110 days. Since quantity seized was a 'small quantity' he is entitled to statutory bail as charge sheet is not yet to be framed. Contention of the petitioner is that each ampule contains 0.3 gms. of Buprenorphine and hence what was seized is a small quantity below 1 gm. The Sessions Judge while rejecting the bail application found that since each ampule contains 2 ml....
Parameswaran Nair Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-13-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)KLT167
M. Ramachandran, J.1. An appeal from judgment dated 28-10-1997 in O.P.No. 14331 of 1996 has been filed by the defeated petitioner. The challenge made in the Original Petition principally was against Ext.P5 which directed recovery of an amount of Rs. 1,33,993/- from the petitioner/appellant. The appeal filed therefrom had been rejected by the Government. Learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri. P.K. Ashokan submits that the contention as had been raised by the petitioner had practically been overlooked by the learned Judge and therefore, interference is warranted.2. We may refer to the brief facts which might be necessary for disposal of the appeal. Petitioner had been functioning as Radiographer Grade-II attached to the E.S.I. Hospital, Olarikkara. It seems that there were certain complaints against the functioning of the Institution and a memo had been issued to the petitioner on 5-9-1991 pointing out that there was anomaly found in the stock of X-ray films when verification was conduc...
Sasidharan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-13-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ989
J.B. Koshy, J.1. An unmarried 34 year old poor woman, who was not mentally steady, was missing after' she went for work on 5-7-1993. On 13-7-1993, the dead body was seen burled. In the post-mortem report it was found that she was pregnant by about two months and she was killed by strangulation. The appellant-accused was charged-sheeted under Sections 302 and 201 of I.P.C. for murdering her. The prosecution allegation was that since the accused wanted to avoid the threat and nuisance from the deceased-Radha as the deceased Radha had conceived illegally from the accused, the accused with the full knowledge that by his acts, death would be caused on 5-7-1993 at about 10.30 a.m. tied around the neck of Radha tightly at a place in the rubber plantation at Anakudi and caused by strangulation and thereafter, the accused with the intention of causing disappearance of the evidence of the commission of the offence and to screen the accused from the clutches of law, took away the dead body of the...
T.M. Chacko Vs. Income Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-13-2005
Reported in: (2006)201CTR(Ker)149; [2008]296ITR650(Ker)
Kurian Joseph, J.1. Petitioner challenges Ext. P4 order passed by the CIT. As per the said order, the CIT rejected the case of the petitioner for waiver of interest under Section 220(2A) of the IT Act, 1961. The stand taken by the CIT in the impugned order is that the petitioner is having substantial immovable properties at Ponkunnam, Munnar and Kanjirappally. According to the CIT, the petitioner was not successful in establishing the case before him that the payment of interest will cause genuine hardship. Learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contends that in the background of the petitioner taking care of a destitute and sickly sister, the death of his son and all the business establishments have since been closed, etc., there is a genuine hardship.2. In the statement filed on behalf of the 1st respondent, it is stated that the assessment for the years 1977-78, 1980-81 and 1984-85 were rectified and adjustments have already been made against the dues for 1986-87 and 1987-88 ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »