Kerala Court September 2007 Judgments
Valliyamma Vs. the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-28-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)KLJ371
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioner, though she pleads that she is pretty old and infirm, does not dispute the fact that she had provided her lands as collateral security for the loan availed by the third respondent from the second respondent-Bank. Recovery certificate was issued by the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Recovery Officer brought the property to sale and sold it in auction for Rs. 7.50 lakhs which is Rs. 20,000/- in excess of the upset price fixed. After the auction sale, petitioner invoked Rule 60 in Schedule II of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which provides for setting aside a sale of immovable property on deposit. Ext. P3 order W.P.C. No. 28824 of 2007 Decided on 28-09-2007 has been issued by the Recovery Officer on the ground that the said application was not accompanied by requisite deposit of amount due as per recovery certificate.2. According to the petitioner, she filed Ext. P4 appeal against that order before the Debts Recovery Tribunal as an indigent person and the...
Tag this Judgment!Philipose Abraham Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-28-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)KLJ517
H.L. Dattu, C.J.1. In the Writ Appeal filed, the appellant has arrayed Mr. Mathew T. Thomas, Honourable Minister for Transport, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram, Mr. Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, Honourable Minister for Home, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram and the State Public Information Officer, Police Headquarters, Thiruvananthapuram as respondents 6,7 and 8.2. At the time of hearing of this appeal, appellant has filed an application, I.A. No. 805 of 2007. In the affidavit filed in support of the application, at paragraphs 2 and 3 it is stated as under;2. I filed IA 772/07 to have the Writ Appeal heard and disposed of emergently since I am due to retire in 6 months time and since my transfer before completing the minimum tenure has been stigmatic on my reputation and a blot on my career. In view of the fact that notices have not been issued to the 6th, 7th and 8th respondents and since service of notice on them will entail further delay in having the Writ Appeal heard, I am constrained to ...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesh A.R. Vs. Asst. Secretary, Thrissur Corporation Electricity Wing ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-28-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR908]; 2008(1)KLJ304
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The issue that arises for decision in this case is as to whether the regulations issued by the Kerala State Electricity Board, hereinafter the 'Board', to govern the service conditions of its employees, applicable to the employees in the Electricity Wing of the Thrissur Corporation, hereinafter, the 'Corporation'.2. Petitioner's father, while employed in the Electricity Wing of the Corporation, met with a motor accident on 5-9-2000, resulting in injuries that led to him being paid invalid pension. Thereafter, the petitioner applied on 2-1-2002 for appointment on compassionate grounds, referable to the invalid situation of his father. The Director of Municipal Administration recommended that request favourably on 14-11-2002. The Government rejected the request of the petitioner by the impugned Ext. F7 order, passed after directions were issued by this Court for consideration of the claim of the petitioner on merits.3. Petitioner challenges Ext. P7 order...
Tag this Judgment!Hotel Asoka Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer-1, Dept of Comml. Taxes
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-28-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)KLJ419; (2009)25VST546(Ker)
H.L. Dattu, C.J.1. This judgment would dispose of Writ Appeal No. 1877 of 2007 and connected appeals, which have been filed against the common judgment passed by learned single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 8711 of 2007 and connected matters, whereby petitions filed by the appellants under Article 226 of the Constitution of India were dismissed. The question which arises for determination in these appeals is whether the amended provisions of Section 7(a) and (b) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 can be applied to those dealers who had opted for payment of Turnover Tax for the assessment year 2006-07 before the amendment was brought into the statute and whether the dealers are entitled to pay tax at the rate prescribed in Clause (a) of Section 7 of the KGST Act before its amendment on the purchase of liquor for the assessment year 2006-07.2. The appellants are registered dealers under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred t...
Tag this Judgment!Meenakshi D/O Kutty Vs. Udayakumar S/O Viswambaran and State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-27-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)KLT620
ORDERV. Ramkumar, J.1. The revision petitioner, who is the complainant in S.T. No. 143/06 on the file of JFCM-II, Haripad, challenges the order dated 5.2.07 passed by the said Magistrate returning the complaint presumably under Section 201 Cr.P.C. for presenting a same before the proper court having jurisdiction within two weeks.2. The above private complaint was filed against the first respondent accused alleging the commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in respect of a cheque bearing No. 509004 drawn on the Pallickal Branch of the State Bank of India for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- allegedly issued by the accused to discharge his liability towards a loan said to have been availed by him from the revision petitioner/complainant.3. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and recorded the sworn statement of the complainant and took the case on file as S.T. No. 143/2006. On receipt of summons, the accused entered appearance. The...
Tag this Judgment!ing Vysya Bank Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-27-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Ker31; 2008(1)KLJ177
K. Balakrishnan Nair, J.1. The petitioner is a private sector bank. It has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents 2 to 11 to afford sufficient police protection and take sufficient steps restraining the respondents 12 to 23 and other demonstrators from-agitating within 100 metres of the premises of the petitioner's bank viz. Regional Office at 'Shema' Building, M.G. Road, Ravipuram, Branch Office at Manorama Junction, Panampally Nagar, P. K. Commercial Complex, Cherootty Road, Calicut and Union Shopping Complex, Thalap Road, Kannur and other branches in the State of Kerala, of the petitioner where the respondents may initiate demonstration and also to take appropriate action against any person violating the provisions of Section 36AD of the Banking Regulation Act.ii) Grant such other reliefs which are appropriate and incidental in this proceeding...
Tag this Judgment!Subaida and ors. Vs. A.A. Abdul Nazir
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-27-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)KLJ64
ORDERPius C. Kuriakose, J.1. The petitioners and the respondent are partners of a partnership firm by name 'M/s. King Beedi Company'. Annexure A is the deed of partnership. Clause 21 therein is an arbitration clause which provides that any dispute or question in connection with the partnership deed or the carrying on of business or management of the partnership shall be decided by referring to arbitration of two arbitrators appointed by the parties in dispute and that the award given by the arbitrators shall be binding on all the parties in the partnership deed. By Annexure B letter, the respondent expressed his desire to retire from the partnership and through Annexure C, the petitioners, the remaining partners accepted the retirement. Alleging that in spite of his retirement, the respondent is trying to interfere with the day-to-day administration and affairs of the firm, the petitioners moved the District Court, Thrissur by filing O.P. (Arb.) No. 157 of 2006 under Section 9 of the A...
Tag this Judgment!The Regional Director of E.S.i. Corporation Vs. Hotel Alukkas
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR41]; 2008(1)KLJ296; (2008)ILLJ738Ker
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the Regional Director of E.S.I. Corporation aggrieved by the order of the Employees State Insurance Court in IC. No. 17 of 2000 holding that the incentive payment made by the applicant is in the nature of a gift and therefore cannot be treated as wages as defined in Section 2(22) of the E.S.I. Act and no contribution can be demanded on such payment.2. Respondent herein filed application before the Insurance Court assailing Ext. A3 order dated 28-2-2000 issued under Section 45-A of the ESI Act by which contribution was assessed on alleged omitted wages coming under the heads repairs/maintenance and incentive. Hotel Alukkas is an establishment covered under the Employees State Insurance Act which was required to pay contribution in accordance with Section 40 of the Act read with Regulations 29 and 31 of the ESI (General) Regulations 1950. Since the employer had failed to pay contribution as required by law, a notice was issued to the e...
Tag this Judgment!Panchamy Pack (Kerala) Ltd. Vs. Travancore Devaswom Board
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Ker36; 2007(3)KLJ586
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioner, a private limited company, has approached this Court seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext. PI order dated 23-8-2007 issued by the Travancore Devaswom Board black-listing the petitioner company and excluding them from all dealings with the Board. Petitioner submits that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and also the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.2. Travancore Devaswom Board had executed an agreement on 13-4-1999 with the petitioner-company for manufacturing, packing and supplying of Aravana Prasadam through the sale counters of the Travancore Devaswom Board. At the initial stage, name of the company was M/s. Pamchami Exporters Private Limited and later directors of the above mentioned company incorporated another company by name 'Panchami Pack (Kerala) Private Limited' for production of Aravana as per BOT scheme. As per Clause 9 of ...
Tag this Judgment!K.P. Hamsa S/O. Late Saidali Haji, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Sales ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: (2009)20VST72(Ker)
K.T. Sankaran, J.1. The questions involved in this Writ Appeal are : (1) To attract Section 26-A of the Kerala General Sales Tax, is it necessary that a demand for collection of arrears of Sales Tax be made? (2) Whether the assignees of an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, which transaction is hit by Section 26-A, could claim that they are bonafide transferees so as to avoid the rigour of Section 26-A? (3) Whether before Revenue Recovery sale, the person in possession could be directed to vacate the house in the property sought to be sold2. The parties are referred to hereunder as per their rank in the Writ Petition. The 4th respondent firm, M/s Marvel Industries, is an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. Respondents 5 and 6 are the partners of the firm. The counter affidavit filed by the Assistant Commissioner (law) holding the charge of the Joint Commissioner (Law), Department of Commercial Taxes, in the Writ Appeal reveals that the 4th respondent firm is ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »