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.
Surendra Kumar Vs. Vijayan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)KLT475
ORDERKurian Joseph, J.1. Whether a Sessions Judge has power under Section 408 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to transfer a case after commencement of trial or a part heard appeal from the court of Additional Sessions Judge to another competent court within the sessions division is the crucial and main question that arises for consideration in this case. Another important question is, whether a litigant as a matter of right can approach the Sessions Judge for invocation of power under Section 409 for withdrawing or recalling a case which is already made over to an Additional Sessions Court. And the third is whether a litigant should necessarily exhaust his remedy before the Sessions Court under Section 408 or 409 before approaching the High Court under Section 407 for the transfer. The matter has been placed before us pursuant to reference made by V. Ramkumar, J.2. Though several questions are posed in the order, answer to the three points referred to above would cover all the ...
Joseph Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)KLT504
S. Siri Jagan, J.1. By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge repelled the challenge of the appellant against Ext.P9 notification issued by the 1st respondent-State of Kerala under Section 5 of the Kerala Preservation of Trees Act, 1986 (for short 'the Act') prohibiting cutting of trees in the area referred to therein, which area was exempted from vesting under Section 3(3) of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting & Assignment) Act, 1971, by orders of the Forest Tribunal, as confirmed by this Court in appeal, as a property intended for cultivation, in favour of the father of the appellant which he claims to have devolved by succession on the appellant. That judgment is under challenge in this appeal.2. The contentions of the appellant against Ext.P9 notification are threefold. (1) In so far as the land in question had been exempted from vesting by order of the Forest Tribunal and confirmed by this Court in Appeal, under Section 3(3) of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Ass...
Abdul Gafoor Vs. Abdulla
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-2005
Reported in: II(2007)BC121; [2006]129CompCas97(Ker); 2005(4)KLT840
ORDERK. Thankappan, J.1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner to have an order under Section 427 Cr.P.C to the effect that the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner in C.C.Nos.263 of 2003 and 264 of 2003 by JFCM-II, Thamarassery shall run concurrently. The petitioner faced trial in the above two cases for the offences punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, 1881. The complaints in both the cases have been filed by the common complainant alleging that the petitioner had borrowed certain amounts from the complainant, the first respondent herein and in discharge of that debt, the petitioner had issued two cheques which were dishonoured when the same were presented for encashment The dishonour of the cheques was due to insufficiency of funds in the account maintained by the petitioner with the bank. Further it is stated that the respondent had served the statutory notice to the petitioner and inspite of that the petitioner failed to pay the amount cover...
A.M. Sainalabdeen Musaliar Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-2005
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(Ker)585; [2006]282ITR362(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. 1. The petitioner is challenging Ext. P11(a) issued by the first respondent demanding differential amount payable by the petitioner under Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 for the asst. yrs. 1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93. According to the petitioner, first respondent issued Ext. P7 under Section 90(2) r/w Section 91 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, demanding a total amount of Rs. 3,31,120 which was paid by the petitioner in full and final settlement of liability for the three asst. yrs. 1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93. The petitioner's case is that the first respondent has no authority to modify Ext. P7 which was accepted by the petitioner by making payment. The petitioner has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Smt. Sushila Rani v. CIT and Anr. : [2002]253ITR775(SC) and contended that the CIT has no power to modify Ext. P7 issued under the KVSS.2. I heard counsel for the petitioner and standing counsel for the IT Department. Ext. P11(a) is issued by th...
P.A. Ahammed Vs. Chief Cit and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-2005
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(Ker)378
C.N. Ramachanidran Nalr, J.Heard, Counsel for the petitioner and standing counsel for income-tax department. The petitioner is challenging Ext. P14 order issued by the Chief Commissioner of Icome Tax justifying the transfer of petitioner's file from the present assessing officer under the Income Tax Act to the Central Circle. Ext. P14 is issued by way of clarification pursuant to direction contained in an earlier judgment obtained by the petitioner from this Court. It is seen from Ext. P13 that cases of 18 assessees are transferred by the Chief CIT from the regular assessing officers to Central Circle after conducting raid and after detection of unaccounted income. The petitioner is one among the 18 assessees whose files were transferred to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Trivandrum. When the petitioner approached this court challenging Ext. P13 stating that the petitioner was not informed about the reason for transfer of file, this court directed the (Chief)'...
P.A. Ahammed Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-2005
Reported in: (2006)201CTR(Ker)378; [2006]282ITR334(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and standing counsel for IT Department. The petitioner is challenging Ext. P14 order issued by the Chief CIT justifying the transfer of petitioner's file from the present AO under the IT Act to the Central Circle. Ext. P14 is issued by way of clarification pursuant to direction contained in an earlier judgment obtained by the petitioner from this Court. It is seen from Ext. P13 that cases of 18 assessees are transferred by the Chief CIT from the regular AOs to Central Circle after conducting raid and after detection of unaccounted income, The petitioner is one among the 18 assessees whose files were transferred to the Asstt. CIT, Central Circle, Trivandrum. When the petitioner approached this Court challenging Ext. P13 stating that the petitioner was not informed about the reason for transfer of file, this Court directed the (Chief)'CIT to consider the matter afresh and based on the said direction, the Chief CIT issued Ext. ...
Ummer Farooque Vs. Naseema
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-05-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)KLT565
R. Bhaskaran, J.1. R.P.(FC).No. 49 of 2005 arises out of M.C.No. 561 of 2003 filed by the respondent herein under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for maintenance and Mat. A.No. 76 of 2005 arises out of O.P.No. 191 of 2004. for arrears of maintenance filed by the respondent wife. In the claim for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellant contended that there was already a divorce effected by the pronouncement of talaq on 23-7-1999 and the divorced wife was not entitled for claiming maintenance. Arrears of maintenance was claimed for the period from 29-10-2000 to 28-10-2003. The claim was opposed on the ground that there was already a divorce in 1999 and the respondent is not entitled to claim any maintenance. At the time of argument of the O.P. before the Family Court, a contention was also raised that the respondent was not entitled to claim arrears of maintenance unless she pleaded and proved that she belonged to Shafi sect. This cont...
Golden Traders Vs. Commr. of Commercial Taxes
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)KLT953; [2006]144STC141(Ker)
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Whether 'fridge stand' is an item of goods coming under entries to serial number 6 of the V Schedule to the Kerala General Sales tax Act, 1963 is the question that is posed for consideration in these cases.2. M.F.A. No 1356 of 2002 is an appeal filed under Section 40 of the Kerala General Sales tax Act challenging the clarificatory order dated 2.8.2002 issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes holding that fridge stand is an accessory of refrigerator and the rate applicable to the 'fridge stand' is the rate applicable to refrigerator under entry 6th of V Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.3. W.P.C. No 18130 of 2003 is a Writ Petition filed challenging the above clarificatory order dated 2.8.2002 and Ext. P2 notice dated 28.4.2003 issued under Sections I9 of the Act proposing to reopen the assessment and also Ext. P4 assessment order applying the clarificatory order and making fridge stand as an accessory of refrigerator and applying the rat...
State of Kerala Vs. Hariharan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-04-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)KLT173
J.B. Koshy, J.1. This appeal is filed by the State against the acquittal of the accused, four in number, in S.C.No. 505/1999 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Kasaragod. The accused were charge sheeted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The prosecution case was summed up by the Sessions Judge as follows:Two police constables attached to Hosdurg Police Station, PW1 and PW2, were on picket duty at Keloth on the night of 29-9-1996 in view of law and order problems arising from political skirmishes in that locality. At about 10.30 pm., being informed by three pedestrians passing through that some one was lying beside, at Chalingal Slope, with them PW-1 and PW-2 proceeded to the spot and found a person lying in sanguinine bathe with injuries over the head and lower limbs. He was rushed to District Hospital in an autorickshaw by the two constables and the three pedestrians and on the way to the queries of PW-1, the victim revealed his identity as Rajan son of Krishnan and that he w...
Soya Vs. A.K. Mohanan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-04-2005
Reported in: 2(2006)DMC298
K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J.1. Wife, faced with a decree of divorce on the ground of adultery, is the appellant. The main contention urged is that there is no cogent evidence to arrive at a finding that she was guilty of adultery in order to grant divorce. The only available evidence in support of the allegation was the interested testimony of respondent-husband and certain letters alleged to have been written by the step-father of the appellant to the father of the husband-respondent. Exts. A5 to A10 are the letters. All these letters, except AS and A7, are addressed to the father of the husband and one is written by the brother-in-law. Neither the brother-in-law nor the step-father of the wife was examined. The father of the husband was also not examined. In such circumstances, such letters did not have acceptability in evidence as being not properly proved as known to law. On the other hand, Exts. A5 and A7 are addressed to one Mohanan, who is none other than the husband. Exts. A5 and A7 d...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›