Kerala Court September 2006 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.
Kerala Unaided B.Ed. College Management Assn. Vs. University of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-22-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KLT864
S. Siri Jagan, J.1. Common issues arise in these Writ Petitions and therefore they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. A very important question of general public importance arises in these cases, which, in fact, would indirectly affect the very basis of the educational system in this State as a whole as a necessary consequence. The matter relates to the date on which the eligibility criteria for the purpose of admission to the B.Ed. course in the State for the year 2006-2007 is to be reckoned. The Commissioner of Entrance Examinations issued prospectus for admission to B.Ed. courses, 2006 in the State of Kerala as approved by the Government of Kerala vide GO. (Rt.) No. 107/2006/H.Edn. dated 17-1-2006. The prospectus is stated to be applicable for admission to B.Ed. Degree Courses in Government/Aided/Private Self-financing Colleges in Kerala. As per the prospectus, the course in the various colleges, especially in private self-financing colleges consisted of three types of...
State of Kerala Vs. Aluva Sugar Agency Overruled
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-22-2006
Reported in: (2007)8VST726(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The question raised in the revision 1 case filed by the State is whether the Tribunal is justified in granting concessional rate of tax on BISBRI brand bakery margarine sold by the petitioner at four per cent treating it as edible oil under item 17A of the Second Schedule of Notification SRO No. 1728 of 1993 for the assessment year 1997-98. Margarine is one of the items falling under entry 90 of the First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 which attracts tax at the point of first sale at eight per cent. Entry 90 of the First Schedule to the KGST Act and entry 17A of the Second Schedule to SRO No. 1728 of 1993 are respectively extracted hereunder for easy reference:First Schedule to the KGST Act:----------------------------------------------------------------Sl. Description fo goods Point of levy Rate of tax(percentage)-----------------------------------------------------------------90 Oils, edible or inedible At the point of 8including refin...
Muraleedharan Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-20-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KLT564
K. Balakrishnan Nair, J.1. Common questions arise for consideration in these Writ Petitions and therefore, they are heard together and disposed of, by this common judgment.2. The inter se seniority dispute between direct recruits and promotees to the Indian Forest Service (hereinafter referred to as 'I.F.S.'), is the main point that arises for decision in these cases. A Division Bench of this Court referred these cases to the Fuil Bench, by reference order dated 1.2.2006. The main point referred for decision by the Full Bench is, whether a promotee I.F.S. Officer can get an year of allotment, which is earlier to the date of attainment of eligibility for induction of such promotee from the State Forest Service to the I.F.S. The reference order reads as follows:The petitioners were occupying posts in the State Forest Service. They were entitled to be inducted to Indian Forest Service in accordance with the Indian (Forest) Service Rules, 1966, as per Rule 4(2)(b) thereof. Rule 6(3) of the...
Ajaya Kumar Vs. Deepthi Krishnan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-20-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KLT768
K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J.1. The petitioner, the plaintiff in C.S.No. 130/03 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kottarakkara, entered into an agreement (Ext.Pl) for purchase of the property from the first defendant, who is a partner along with one Abdul Khader in K.K.Industries. The partnership has set up a crusher unit in the property concerned. The half share in the property and the industry entitled to the plaintiff was agreed to be sold as per Ext.P 1 agreement. The amount payable in terms of the agreement by the petitioner to the plaintiff is only Rs. 21.5 lakhs. The agreement was not performed. Therefore a suit was brought in for specific performance. The court fee was remitted based on the aforesaid amount payable by the petitioner. Objection was raised by the 1st defendant contending that the total value of the property to be conveyed is Rs. 1.3 crores and half right eligible to the 1st defendant comes to Rs. 65.7 lakhs. That being the value of the property, court fee ought to ha...
Abdul Kader Vs. Accounts Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-20-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KLT515; 2007(2)SLJ378(Kerala)
K.M. Joseph, J.1. Petitioner joined as part time contingent sweeper in the Government Mopila School, Kunhimangalam, Kannur District on 10.10.1964. On 12.2.1969 he was relieved from the said School. Thereafter, on 13.2.1969 he entered the service of the erstwhile Public Health Engineering Department as a Peon advised by Public Service Commission. Thereafter, he was absorbed by the Kerala Water Authority and he retired on superannuation on 31.10.2002. His complaint is that though he is entitled to count fifty per cent of the part time contingent service which he rendered while he worked in the aforesaid School as qualifying service for pension, he is denied the said benefit. He made Ext. Pl representation which was rejected by Ext. P3. It is the case of the petitioner that even though the second respondent recommended to compute fifty per cent of the part time contingent service of petitioner as qualifying service and to revise his pensionary claim vide Ext. P4, that was rejected by the ...
Jyothi Surendran Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-20-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KLT366
Kurian Joseph, J.1. Whether a beneficiary of a Trust is entitled to get a certified copy of the Trust deed from the concerned Sub Registry office under the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 is the question to be considered in this Writ Petition. Petitioner is the beneficiary No. 19 in A.P.B. Family Trust, Kozhikode. The deed is registered as document No. 243/1983 of Kozhikode Sub Registry. The same is entered in book No. 4. According to the petitioner the Trust is not managed properly and she intends to file a suit under the Trusts Act for which an authenticated copy of the Trust deed is necessary. An application was filed before the second respondent. The same was returned stating that in view of the bar under Section 57(3) of the Act, the copy cannot be supplied, as can be seen from the endorsement made in Ext.P2.2. Section 51 of the Act provides for register of books to be kept in the registration office:Book 1, 'Register of non-testamentary documents relating to immovable pr...
Ram Bhat Vs. Leelaram Shevaram (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-19-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KLT609
V. Ramkumar, J.1. Defendants 3 and 4 in O.S. 97/91 on the file of the principal Sub Court, Kochi, are the appellants in this appeal. The said suit instituted by respondents 1 and 2 herein was for realization of a sum of Rs. 41,113.75 together with interest at the rate of 15% totaling altogether to Rs. 55,112.75.The plaint Averments In Brief:2. The case of the plaintiffs can be summarized as follows:The first plaintiff is a Company by name M/s. Leelaram Shevaram (India) Pvt. Ltd. represented by its Manager, the 2nd plaintiff. The first defendant represented by defendants 2 and 5, is a registered partnership firm by name Sri Ram Traders of which defendants 2 to 5 are the partners. On 11.7.1988 the first defendant firm purchased 145 bags of boiled rice at the rate of Rs. 440 quintal. The total value of the goods so purchased was Rs. 48,113.75 After the purchase of goods, the first defendant firm issued Ext. A3 cheque for the aforesaid amount. When the cheque was presented for encashment b...
Ernakulam District Private Bus Operators Association Vs. State of Kera ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-19-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Ker52; 2006(4)KLT531
J.B. Koshy, J.1. All these Writ Petitions except W.P.(C) No. 31156 of 2005 are filed by the private bus operators questioning the imposition and enhancement of fees collected by the Corporation of Kochi at the rate of Rs. 20/- per day by Eixt.Pl notification dated 10.1.2005. It is their contention that more than 700 buses are passing through Kaloor bus stand itself and at the ratcof Rs. 20/- per day more than Rs. 7200/- will be collected from each vehicle per year. According to them, the fees charged by the Corporation is illegal and arbitrary and liable to be set aside. It is also argued by the bus owners that increase of fees from Rs. 10/- to Rs. 20/- is arbitrary and virtually there is no quid pro quo and no service is rendered by the Corporation except name sake services done in the four bus stands. The private bus operators contended that they are paying huge motor tax apart from wages to their employees and there is separate allotment to Corporation for maintenance of road from r...
T.P. Ashraf Vs. Fousia M.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-19-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ700
ORDERR. Basant, J.1. Is rigid and ritualistic adherence to the law of pleadings necessary or justified in proceedings under Section 125, Cr.P.C.? This is the relevant question thrown up for consideration in this revision petition directed against an order passed under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 2,000/- per mensem as maintenance to the claimant, his wife.2. The marriage is admitted. Separate residence of the spouses is also admitted. That the petitioner has married again, while his marriage with the claimant-his wife subsists is also not disputed. That the petitioner was employed abroad at the time when the petition was filed is also not disputed at all. It is also brought to the notice of the Court that earlier an ex parte order directing payment of maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per mensem was passed. That ex parte order was later set aside.3. Before the Court below there was the evidence of the claimant as PW 1. The petitioner ...
Ranganayaki Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-18-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)KLT281; (2007)10VST799(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Question raised is whether petitioner is liable to pay sales tax on the sales turnover of Benz Car sold during the year 1998-99. Petitioner, admittedly, is a trader holding registration under the KGST Act. The Car purchased was retained as a business asset which is a fact not disputed by petitioner. Assessing Officer treated the sale of the Car as a transaction incidental to business and hence levied tax. First appellate authority allowed the appeal, holding that petitioner's purchase is a local purchase of the car from an importer who imported the Car from abroad. The logic applied by the first appellate authority is that petitioner's sale is a second sale and hence not liable to be assessed. Tribunal, on the other hand, held that in the absence of proof of payment hi tax on first sale, in terms of Rule 32(13) of the KGST Rules, petitioner is liable to pay tax.2. During hearing, counsel for petitioner submitted that the Tribunal went wrong in reversing the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »