Kerala Court November 2008 Judgments

Fr. Jose Poothrikkayil Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009CriLJ1632; 2009(1)KLJ159

ORDERR. Basant, J.1. The crusade for justice to deceased Sr. Abhaya still remains only a cry in the wilderness. No organized prayers, fasting or agitation have been devoted to the cause of identifying her detractors. But it is a tribute to the civil society of Kerala that even after 16 long years, despite all the odds, the fight for justice top her is not given up yet. Whether written in Deva Nagari script at the appropriate spot or not, the Indian Constitutional Republic believes and has faith in the eternal principle or axiom (or is it only a fiction to motivate the righteous) that truth shall ultimately triumph - Satyameva Jayathe. Invoking that sublime axiom, let be address myself to the issues.2. A synoptic resume of the events may be relevant. The dead body of Sr. Abhaya, a young lass in her ate teens, a nun was found in a well in the compound of the Convent where she was an inmate. This was on 27.3.1992. Hurriedly initial investigation appears to have been done by the local poli...

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Lolakshi

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009ACJ2319

J.B. Koshy, J.1. This appeal is filed by the insurance company against the judgment of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner in awarding compensation for a workman who was murdered during the course of employment, on an application by his widow and five children. It is the case of the appellant that the murder has nothing to do with the use of the motor vehicle and it is not arising out of employment.2. Facts of the case are that the deceased was engaged by the opposite party No. 1 to drive his autorickshaw. There is no dispute that deceased was a workman as defined in the Act. While he was on duty, two persons hired the autorickshaw and he was killed by them. When they hired the autorickshaw, the deceased thought that they were bona fide passengers and they had no previous enmity with him, but they killed him. If he were aware that they are not bona fide passengers, he would not have allowed them to travel in his autorickshaw. The Commissioner has found that the murderers hired the ...

The Asst.Engineer, Kseb, Electrical Section and Another Vs. C.J. Josep ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA: MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Kottayam in the file of OP.500/02 dated.19th January 2005. The opposite parties are the appellants who prefers this appeal from the finding of the Forum below. The Forum below ordered that to set aside Ext.A2 bill for Rs.29017/- and subsequent bill dated.5.12.02 for Rs.2684/- and the opposite party is also directed to issue fresh bill under one year tariff which the petition is liable to pay. It is the order that the petitioner is liable to pay current charges under tariff one and only the opposite parties are also directed to pay cost or Rs.500/- which can be adjusted in the future bill or pay by directing. The brief of the case is that the complainant is a consumer of the opposite parties, having domestic connection with Con.NO.5993 under tariff 1A and commercial connection with NO.7676 under tariff 7A in the same bill. The residential construction portion of the building is having Panchayath No.175...

Indian Oil Corporation Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2009Ker114; 2009(2)KLJ144

Pius C. Kuriakose, J.1. The Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., a Government of India Company engaged in refining and marketing of petroleum products through out the country challenges in this writ petition Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 as introduced by Amending Act 68 of 1984. The first respondent in the writ petition is the Union of India and the second respondent is the State of Kerala. The additional third respondent got himself impleaded in the writ petition claiming that he is vitally interested in the result of the writ petition pointing out that 50 acres of land in Kalpetta Village in Wayanad District over which he was having one-third right was acquired recently under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and that being out satisfied with the compensation awarded, at his instance a reference under Section 18 is pending before the Sulthan Batheri Sub Court. The petitioner company submits that their grievance is confined to the fixation of 15% interest under ...

Soman M.R. Vs. the Electoral Officer and anr.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(1)KLJ211

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader.2. The petitioner challenges the rejection of the nomination submitted by him for election to the committee of a co-operative society. Admittedly, he did not make the declaration to be made by the candidate, though he states that he has made a declaration to be made by a candidate who is contesting to the seat reserved for SC/ST. He, therefore, contends that such a declaration would be sufficient and would be one in lieu of the declaration of the candidate as required by Form No. 36 issued in terms of Rule 35A(6)(a) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969, for short, the 'Rules'. The argument on behalf of the petitioner is that a declaration that the petitioner is qualified to contest for election in the seat reserved for SC/ST candidates in the election proposed to be held on a particular day should necessarily be treated to include his declaration that he has no disquali...

M.A. Unnerikutty Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Kerala

Reported in: [2009]180TAXMAN366(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in O.P. No. 19693 of 1997, the Tribunal referred the following question of law for our decision:Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), upholding the reassessment under Section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1971-72 2. The case of the assessee is that income escaping assessment made under Section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act is beyond the jurisdiction of the Officer because the reason for reopening of assessment is unaccounted purchase of copra for Rs. 59,392. The assessee's case was that stock was declared and so much so all material facts were disclosed by him. However, the finding of the Tribunal is that the assessee accounted the stock as not belonging to him, but as belonging to agriculturists, who had left copra with him for sale. However, the assessee could not prove that the copra...

Usha P. Panicker Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(1)KLJ43

S. Siri Jagan, J.1. The petitioner is the Director and Principal of S.B. College of Engineering and Industrial Training Centre (ITC), which is an institution recognised both by the Government of Kerala and the Government of India as an Industrial Training Centre imparting training in various courses like Electronics and Communication, Civil Engineering, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning, Fitter Training, Draftsman (Civil), Diesel Mechanic course etc. Exts.P1 and P2 orders of the Directorate of the Technical Education prove that the petitioner's institution is recognised by the Governments. The land and building in which the educational institution is functioning, is also owned by the petitioner, who is an individual. The petitioner has been running the ITC from 1976 onwards. According to the petitioner, as per Section 235(1)(d) of the Kerala Municipality Act, the petitioner is entitled to get exemption from payment of property tax on the building of the petitioner, in which the educat...

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. .P.C. Manoj

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party/Insurance Company in OP:109/02 in the file of CDRF, Idukki. The appellant is under orders to pay a sum of Rs.44,847/- with interest at 6% from the date of complaint and Rs.1500/- as cost. 2. It is the case of the complainant that he purchased a vehicle on 5..7..2001 and the vehicle was registered on 10..7..2001. The vehicle met with an accident on 26..7..2001. But the opposite party has given only Rs.59,286/- towards the amount claimed for the repairs of the vehicle. As per the bills of the repairers the amount would work out to Rs.1,04,133/-. 3. It is the contention of the opposite party that a sum of Rs.59,286/- was paid as the matter was settled on non standard basis as the vehicle was not having fitness certificate. It is the contention that the vehicle was insured as a commercial vehicle and hence the policy conditions have not been satisfied at the time of the accident. 4. The evidence adduced consiste...

T.P. Manoharan Vs. T.P. Bhaskaran,

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(3)KLJ878

ORDERV. Ramkumar, J.1. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 99 of 2006 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Kuthuparamba are the appellants in this second appeal. The said suit was one for appointing the 1st plaintiff as the guardian of the person and property of his sister the 2nd plaintiff who is said to be suffering from 60% deafness. No other prayer was made in the plaint. The person arrayed as the defendants in the suit were the 3 brothers and a sister of the plaintiffs.2. According to the plaintiffs, their father T.P. Kunhappa was a retired Lans Nayak in the Indian Army. After the death of their father their mother Sarada was receiving family pension to the tune of Rs. 2,300/- per month. While so, Sarada died on 17.10.2004. The 2nd plaintiff is an unmarried, unemployed lady who has no source of income and is suffering from the aforementioned disability. She is staying along with the 1st plaintiff. Defendants 1,2 and 3 are the brothers and the 4th defendant is the other sister of the plainti...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sitaram Textiles

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2009)221CTR(Ker)476; [2009]313ITR330(Ker); [2009]179TAXMAN321(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. These income-tax reference cases arise from orders of the Tribunal issued for the asst. yrs. 1989-90 and 1990-91. Loss returns filed by the assessee for the above two years were accepted by the AO and intimations were sent under Section 143(1)(a) of the IT Act. Regular assessment was completed for the asst. yr. 1990-91 under Section 143(3) of the Act after issuing notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. Later, the AO noticed that the intimations sent were incorrect inasmuch as adjustments towards prima facie inadmissible items namely, disallowance under Rules 6B, 6D and Section 37(2A) were not made. Accordingly notices were sent under Section 154(1)(b) of the Act and assessments were rectified vide two orders dt. 8th Feb., 1994 produced as Annex. A to the reference case. In the appeals filed by the assessee, the CIT(A) held that the proceedings sent under Section 143(1)(a) on 31st Aug., 1990 and 28th Feb., 1991 for the respective assessment years do not con...