Kerala Court December 2008 Judgments

Assistant Executive Engineer, P.H. Sub Division, Kerala Water Authorit ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated first February 2005 passed by CDRF, Kollam in OP.517/03. The complaint in the said original petition was filed by the respondent as complainant against the appellants/opposite parties to get the arrear bill dated 14.10.03 cancelled and also to get restoration of the water connection which was disconnected by the opposite parties. The opposite parties contended that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties; that the complainant failed to pay the minimum water charges from the date of getting the water connection; that the complainant is bound to pay the water charges with fine/penalty as stipulated in regulation 14(b) of the Water Supply Regulations, 1991. The Forum below was of the view that there occurred failure and lapse on the part of the opposite parties in issuing the arrear bills/adjustment bills as provided in Regulation 13 (d) of the Water Supply Regulation, ...

M/S. Deedi Automobiles Vs. Sri. S. Sunilkumar

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party/dealer in OP.397/2000 in the file of CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram. The appellant is under orders to replace the defective engine with a new engine of the Rear Engine Auto Rickshaw and also to pay cost of Rs.1000/- It is the case of the complainant that he purchased a Rear Engine Auto Rickshaw from the opposite party. The same was registered on 30.4.99. It is the contention that within the warranty period, the Auto Rickshaw engine developed complaints. On 10.6.99, according to him the complaints were reported to the opposite party who made an attempt to rectify. It was not success. Also on 7.7.99 and 18.12.99 and other occasions the vehicle was taken to the opposite party. According to him he has spent about 5,000/- for repairs and conveyance charges to the opposite party out fit. He has sought for replacement of engine and also compensation of Rs.5000/-. The opposite parties have filed version contending that th...

Chathapopantavida Balan Vs. Chathappantavida Devi

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(1)KLT52

ORDERR. Basant, J.1. Is a child against whom the parent stakes a claim for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C entitled to contend that the parent must reside with him/her to justify such claim Are Sections 125(3) (second proviso), 125(4) and 125(5) applicable impliedly to the claim of a parent? These questions are raised in this R.P.F.C by the learned Counsel for the petitioners.2. Petitioners were respondents in a claim under Section 125 Cr.P.C staked before the Family Court by the respondent herein, who is the wife of the 1st petitioner and the mother of the 2nd petitioner. The learned Judge of the Family Court had directed the 2nd petitioner alone to pay an amount of Rs. 750/- per mensem as maintenance to the claimant/respondent. The claim against the 1st petitioner was refused. There is no challenge against that. The 1st petitioner has come to this Court with this petition only to give company to his son, the 2nd petitioner. I find no other purpose at all.3. Status of the respond...

Bineesh K.N. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009CriLJ3283

ORDERC.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioner, accused of various offences was in Police custody when this W.P. was filed. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is handcuffed all the time when is under transport or while he is presented before the Court. The offences referred to in this W.P. are cases of cheating registered against the petitioner under Section 420 IPC. However, Government Pleader submitted that petitioner was involved in a murder case and he is as of now a convict serving the sentence in the Central Prison. However, petitioner's case has to be considered because petitioner being an accused in other cases has to be transported on and often to various Courts and back to the prison.2. Counsel for the petitioner has relied on various decisions of the Supreme Court, particularly one in Prem Shankar Shukla v. Delhi Administration : AIR 1980 SC 1535 : 1980 Cri LJ 930, wherein the Supreme Court has held that handcuffing is prima facie inhuman and brutal and therefore, ...

Augustine George Vs. Lizamma Thomas

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(1)KLJ80

ORDERR. Basant, J.1. When can a wife be said to 'refuse' to live with her husband or to disentitle her to receive maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.? Is the traditional and conventional reluctance of a Court to grant the entire claim of a litigant justifiedThese questions come up for consideration in this proceedings.2. The rival contestants in a claim for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. have come before this Court to assail an order passed. In that order, the learned Judge of the Family Court directed the respondent/husband (parties are referred in the manner in which they are arrayed in the M.C.) to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 600/- per mensum to the claimant, admittedly his wife.3. Marriage is admitted. Separate residence is also admitted. There is no contention that the wife is not a person unable to maintain herself. The wife had claimed an amount of Rs. 1,000/- per mensum as maintenance. Along with the claim for maintenance, there were anterior proceedings between...

Kerala Non-banking Finance Companies Welfare Association Vs. Union of ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2009)227CTR(Ker)97; [2009]20STT1; (2009)24VST185(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The first petitioner, an association of non-banking financial companies, and petitioners 2 and 3 its members, have filed this Writ Petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 137 of the Finance Act, 2001 by which service tax is introduced on 'banking and other financial services' which includes 'equipment leasing and hire purchase'. The provisions providing for service tax on equipment leasing and hire-purchase transactions are introduced by amending the Finance Act, 1994. The relevant definition clauses introduced therein are extracted hereunder for easy reference:Section 65(12) 'banking and other financial services' means--(a) the following services provided by a banking company or a financial institution including a non-banking financial company or any other body corporate or commercial concern namely:(i) financial leasing services including equipment leasing and hire-purchase.Explanation.--For the purposes of this item, 'financial leasin...

Nectar Lab Associates Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(1)KLJ264

ORDERRamachandran Nair, J.1. The question raised in these connected Tax Revisions filed by the petitioners is whether animal feed concentrate with vitamin AD3 sold by the petitioners under the brand name Calcimin - D is cattle feed assessable to tax at the rate of 4% under item 26 of the 1st Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') or at the rate of 8% under item 17 of the 1st Schedule to the Act. Besides, the manufacture and sale of the above product, the petitioners are engaged in the manufacture and sale of dog biscuits. Since dog biscuits are not covered in any specific entry, turnover of the same was also assessed under the residua; entry along with the turnover of Calcimin-D. We have heard counsel appearing for the petitioners and Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.2. We do not find any entry for dog biscuits under the 1st Schedule to the Act and, therefore, the turnover of this item was rightly assessed under the residual e...

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2009)12VatReporter54; (2009)22VST459(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. This appeal, though originally dismissed by this Court vide judgment dated November 27, 2006, (Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes ) is restored to file of this Court vide judgment of the Supreme Court dated April 29, 2008 (Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes [2008] 15 VST 10 (SC) in the civil appeal filed by the assessee. We have heard senior counsel Sri Joseph Vellappally and Sri K.N. Sreekumar appearing for the appellant, and Sri K. Vinod Chandran, Special Government Pleader, appearing for the respondent.2. The Supreme Court has specifically directed this Court to consider rules of interpretation of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, hereinafter called the 'Act' and to decide the matter with reference to the said Rules as well. The order under challenge is clarification issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes whereunder he clarified various products of the appellant, namely, Mortein coil...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Anugraha Builders

Court: Kerala

Reported in: [2009]319ITR407(Ker); [2009]183TAXMAN432(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The question raised in the appeal filed by the revenue is whether the Tribunal was justified in sustaining the order of CIT (Appeals) upholding disallowance of interest claimed by the firm amounting to Rs. 3,94,385. We have heard standing Counsel appearing for the appellant and Counsel appearing for the assessee. The total interest claimed for the assessment year concerned, namely, 1998-99, is around Rs. 60 lakhs. However, on verifying the accounts the Assessing Officer noticed that one of the partners has made interest free withdrawal of around Rs. 21 lakhs during the previous year and on account of personal withdrawal by one of the partners, the firm was short of liquidity leading to higher incidence of debt and consequently interest liability. On going through the orders and after hearing parties, we feel the assessee also does not controvert the legal position that personal withdrawal of cash by the partner will lead to liquidity problem leading to high...

Bhima and Brothers Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2010)27VST142(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The question raised in this revision filed by the assessee is whether the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kottayam, was justified in confirming the assessment of purchase turnover of gold valuing Rs. 1,62,30,263.70 under Section 5A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act'). We have heard senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.2. The assessee is a dealer in gold ornaments. During the assessment year 1997-98, the assessee conceded purchase turnover of gold ornaments above Rs. 8 crores. The assessing officer noticed that the assessee accounted purchase of gold ornaments for the value of Rs. 1,62,30,263.70 from close relatives of one of the partners of the petitioner-firm. According to the assessee, the turnover cannot be subjected to purchase tax as it represents value of new gold ornaments purchased from close relatives of one of the partners. The assessing officer ...