Kerala Court December 2008 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shree P. Subramoniam Religious Trust

Court: Kerala

Reported in: [2009]179TAXMAN144(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The common question raised in the two appeals filed by the Department for the assessment years 1993-94 and 1994-95 is whether the Tribunal was justified in granting exemption on the expenditure incurred by the assessee by way of advance made to a cement trader for purchase of cement for construction purposes for the trust. We have heard Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant and counsel appearing for the assessee.2. Assessee is a charitable institution which enjoys registration under Section 12A of the Income-tax Act. During the assessment years 1993-94 and 1994-95, assessee claims to have spent an amount of Rs. 1,50,000 and Rs. 1 lakh respectively towards charitable purposes as contemplated under Section 11(1)(a) of the Act. However, on enquiry, the officer noticed that these amounts were just advanced to a cement trader for purchase of cement for construction of a pilgrim centre at Sabarimala. According to the assessee, construction requires permiss...

Rajeev Shenoy K.R., Trustee of Premier Cable Provident Fund Vs. Offici ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: [2009]152CompCas592(Ker)

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Are the wages for the period after a company suspends the operations of its establishment before an order for winding up, part of workmen's dues entitled to overriding preference in payments in terms of Section 529A of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter 'the Act')?2. The applicant was an employee in the officer cadre in the service of the company under liquidation and is the trustee of the Provident Fund (hereinafter referred to as 'the PF Trust'), duly constituted and approved to cover the officer cadre employees of that company, in terms of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'the PF Act'). He states that the company had to suspend its operations on January 26, 1991, due to labour unrest and the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter 'the BIFR'), declared it a sick unit on September 30, 1991, under the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (for...

C.J. Thomas and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2009Ker94; 2009(1)KLJ373

Thomas P. Joseph, J.1. Can the Railway Claims Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') entertain a claim for compensation in respect of an untoward incident that occurred prior to the enactment of the Railway (Amendment) Act 28 of 1994 with effect from 1-8-1994 is the main issue arising for decision in these appeals. Parties are referred to as applicants and respondent as before the Tribunal for convenience.2. Short facts necessary for consideration of these appeals are: Son of the applicants while travelling in Train No. 6002, Mangalore-Chennai Mail on 24-5-1991 fell down from the train near Thrikkodi Railway Station, sustained serious injuries and succumbed to it. Applicants filed application before the Tribunal in the year 1992 claiming compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/-. That application was dismissed by the Tribunal on 1 -3-1993 for want of jurisdiction since at that time, Tribunal had jurisdiction only to entertain application for compensation arising out of accident to trains. Applicant...

Ambily Ajith Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(1)KLJ38

K.T. Sankaran, J.1. The question involved in these Writ Petitions is whether an order of detention passed under Section 3 of the Kerala Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 by an officer authorised under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 is valid, if it is passed on the subjective satisfaction arrived at on the information received from the SHO of a police station.2. Both these Writ Petitions are filed challenging the order of detention of Ajith Kumar alias Kuttan. W.P.(Crl) No. 314 of 2008 is filed by the wife of the detenue, while W.P.(Crl) No. 316 of 2008 is filed by the mother of the detenue.3. The District Magistrate, Pathanamthitta, who is an authorised officer under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Kerala Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Act'), passed an order of detention dated 19.6.2008, under Section 3(1) of the Act on being satisfied that Ajith Kumar alias Kuttan is a 'Known goonda' and that his detention is necessary with ...

Safiya S/O. Ubaid Vs. Rep. by Secretary,

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(1)KLT7

Kurian Joseph, J.1. Subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority on perusing the report of the sponsoring authority and also the materials forwarded by the Superintendent of Police is the sine qua non for preventive detention under the provisions of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007. Under Section 3 of the Act the District Magistrate passes the order of detention after entering the subjective satisfaction on the basis of the information received from the police officer with regard to the activities of any Known Goonda or Known Rowdy, with a view to preventing such person from committing any anti-social activity within the State of Kerala. The crucial question is whether in a situation of the investigating officer having filed final report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure should the District Magistrate scrutinize the records leading to the final report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The Kerala Anti-Social Acti...

C. Thomas Vs. Kerala Financial Corporation and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2009Ker47; 2009(1)KLT19

A.K. Basheer, J.1. Since these two appeals are directed against a common judgment arising from the same subject matter, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The short question that arises for consideration in these two appeals is whether the auction sale conducted by the Kerala Financial Corporation (for short, the Corporation) of the properties mortgaged by the appellants as co-obligants is illegal and vitiated. The learned singled Judge answered the above question in the negative and dismissed the writ petitions filed by the appellants.3. Relevant facts may be briefly noticed.4. M/s. Pallannattil Construction Company, a registered firm engaged in the business of construction work of roads, bridges etc. had availed of a term loan of Rs. 1.20 Crores from the Corporation, in March 2001. Several items of immovable properties belonging to the partners of the firm as well as to co-obligants were martgaged in favour of the Corporation for availing the loan, as could be seen...

Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Kollam Vs. Isaque

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated:16th May 2005 passed by CDRF, Kollam in OP:333/03. The complaint in the said OP was filed by the respondent/complainant for getting the insurance claim with respect to his insured vehicle bearing Registration No:KL-02-M-8595 which was insured with the opposite party/National Insurance Company, Kollam Branch. It was alleged that the insured vehicle met with a road accident on 26..3..2003 and the vehicle was damaged. The matter was informed to the opposite party. The opposite party deputed a licensed surveyor to assess the loss to the vehicle. The Surveyor submitted the report stating that there was violation of the permit conditions. He assessed the loss/damage to the vehicle at Rs.65,656/-. The opposite party/Insurance Company repudiated the claim put forward by the complainant on the ground that there was suppression of material facts regarding the incident and there was violation of the permit...

Radhakrishnan Vs. the Electoral Registration Officer

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(1)KLT38

S. Siri Jagan, J.1. A very difficult question relating to preparation of electoral roll in a Panchayat bye - election arises in this case. The petitioners claim to be persons residing in the address given in the writ petition. Going by the same, they are persons, who are entitled to be included in the electoral roll for Ward No. 19 of the Shornur Municipality. Election notification for bye - election to that Ward was notified on 14.11.2008. The names of the petitioners were included in the draft electoral roll . Against inclusion of the names of the petitioners in the draft electoral roll, the 5th respondent filed complaint contending that the petitioners are not ordinarily resident in that ward of the Municipality and therefore not entitled to be included in the electoral roll. Based on the complaint of the 5th respondent, Exts.P6 to P9 notices were issued to the petitioners for an enquiry by the Registration Officer. At the time of enquiry, the 5th respondent did not appear. Thereaft...

Smt. Cheruchi and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009CriLJ1051

ORDERV.K. Mohanan, J.1. The above Crl. M.C. is preferred challenging Annexure-A order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Muvattupuzha in exercise of his powers under Section 137(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in M.C. No. 131 of 2007 as the petitioners are aggrieved in staying a proceedings initiated at their instance. Though Annexure-A order is passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Muvattupuzha, the said authority is not arrayed as respondent in this Crl. M.C.2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the functioning of granite quarry in Sy. Nos. 590/12, 590/6, 589/12, 590/7, 589/12, 589/8, 590/19 of Vengoor (W) Village, that too without obtaining necessary permissions from the authorities, create public nuisance and endanger to the life of the residents of Vengoor Village in Ernakulam District. It is stated in the petition that the concerned competent authorities have already found that the functioning of quarry is injurious to the interest of the public. According to ...

The Secretary Devikulam Girijan Service Co-op. Society Vs. the State o ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(1)KLJ272; (2010)27VST574(Ker)

C.N. Ramanchandran Nair, J.1. The question arising in the connected Tax Revision Cases is whether petitioner is liable to pay sales tax at the point of first purchase on the collection and sale of cardamom for it's members. We have heard senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Government Pleader for respondents.2. Petitioner is a society promoted mainly for marketing of agricultural produce of the members who are tribals in the Devikulam Taluk. Cardamom is one item produced by members and marketed by the society. In the curse of assessment, the assessing officer treated the collection of cardamom by the petitioner from the members and sale of the same in auction by auctioneers as purchase and sale by the petitioner. Since cardamom is an item taxable at the point of first purchase in the state, petitioner was called upon to pay sales tax on this. In the first appeal filed by the petitioner, the appellate authority after verifying the records noticed that petitioner was engaged i...