Kerala Court July 2008 Judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K. Sreekantan Pillai

Court: Kerala

Reported in: [2009]181TAXMAN173(Ker)

ORDERH.L. Dattu, CJ.1. This Income-tax Appeal is directed against the orders passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, Cochin in ITA No. 477 of 2006, for the assessment year 2003-04, dated 9-10-2006. The Tribunal has rejected the revenue's appeal only on the ground that the tax effect in the appeal filed by the assessee is less than Rupees two lakhs.2. In the memorandum of appeal filed, the revenue has asserted, that, in view of the Board's Circular dated 24-10-2005, even though the monetary limit of tax effect does not exceed more than Rupees two lakhs, since it involves a substantial question of law of importance, which is urged in the appeal and which may arise in future cases, the Tribunal should consider the appeal and decide the same on merits without being hindered by the monetary limits.3. The Tribunal, without considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, has rejected the appeal, is the grievance of the revenue and its learned Counsel. Reliance is placed on ...

Rajesh Anil and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and anr.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009CriLJ845

ORDERV.K. Mohanan, J.1. The petitioners, who are accused Nos. 1 to 3 in C.C. No. 56 of 2004 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Kozhikode, approach this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Cr.P.C.') seeking an order of quashing Annexure A and all the proceedings thereon including Annexure-F. The above case was instituted on taking cognizance by the court below upon a complaint dated 17.4.2004 filed by the second respondent for the offence punishable under Section 143(1)(a) of the Railways Act, 1989.2. The facts which led to the above case are as follows-According to the prosecution, on 24.4.2003, at about 19.30 hours while Sri. P.P. Joy, Inspector, R.P.F., Kozhikode and party were on confidential watch at the premises of Railway Reservation Office, Kozhikode in connection with illegally procuring and selling of Railway Reservation tickets, they had found that Rajesh Anil (first accused) was moving in a suspicious manner near the r...

The Managing Director, Air India and Another Vs. Prabhakaran

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SMT. VALSALA SARANGADHARAN : MEMBER This appeal is preferred against the order dated.27.9.01 of CDRF, Kozhikode in OP.NO.331/01 directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.28,692/- as compensation with interest at 12% per annum from 28.6.01 the date of the complaint, and Rs.2000/- as costs to the complainant. 2. The facts of the case are that on 23.3.01 the complainant while traveling in the flight of the opposite party from Abudhabi to Calicut lost a checked in baggage. The complainant had with him a hand baggage and the card board box. The card board box was sent as luggage and after obtaining the boarding pass the complainant purchased some articles which were put in a bag supplied by the duty free shop and thus he had two hand baggages with him. When he was about to board the aircraft an employee of the opposite party told him that he cannot carry two hand baggages and therefore the locked hand baggage was handed over by him and the official issued a baggage tag. On reaching C...

Sooppy Haji Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(2)KLJ925; (2009)19VST427(Ker)

ORDERH.L. Dattu, C.J.1. The question for consideration is, whether 'Deluxe Janatha Cem' sold by the assessee is a lime product classifiable as an item falling under Entry 74 of First Schedule to the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, as claimed by the Revenue or under Entry 28 of Schedule II of Notification SRO 1728/93 dated 4-11-1993, issued by the State Government in exercise of its powers under Section 10 of the KGST Act, which speaks of lime and dehydrated lime as claimed by the assessee.2. The revision petitioner is a dealer registered under Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as Act, 1963 and a dealer in hardware, paints and white washing material. The dispute relates to rate of tax in respect of 'Deluxe Janatha Cem' sold by the assessee.3. the assessing authority and the tribunal have taken the view that the Deluxe Janatha Cem sold by the assessee fell outside the scope of Entry 28 of Schedule II of the notification and, therefore...

Prakash K. Raghavendra Rao Vs. Sriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. and a ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2008Ker234; 2008(4)ARBLR553(Kerala)

ORDERM. Sasidharan Nambiar, J.1. What is the procedure to be adopted by a Court when a petition is filed by one of the parties to the suit under Section 8 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. Is the Court to refer the parties to arbitration mechanically by looking into the agreement produced or is it for the court to consider and decide whether the agreement produced was executed by the parties. If it is found that the agreement was executed, is it for the Court to decide whether the agreement is vitiated by fraud or misrepresentation.2. Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), deals with the power to refer parties to arbitration when there is an arbitration agreement. Under Sub-section (1), a judicial authority before which an action is brought in a matter which is the subject of an arbitration agreement and if a party applies not later than before submitting his first statement on the substance of the dispute, Judicial authority sh...

Nazeerkhan S. Vs. the Kerala State Election Commission

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2008Ker240; 2008(2)KLJ916

Antony Dominic, J.1. Ext.P6 order passed by the Kerala State Election Commission, is sought to be quashed in this writ petition. Petitioner is also seeking a declaration that he has not voluntarily given up his membership of the Congress Party so as to disqualify him.2. The facts that led to Ext.P6 order are that the petitioner herein was a candidate sponsored by the Congress party and was elected as a member of the Thrikadavoor Grama Panchayat. There were 21 members in the Panchayat, out of which, nine belonged to Congress (I), eleven belonged to LDF and one was in independent. Ext.X1, the political affiliation register of the Panchayat discloses these details.3. Election of the Vice President was held on 17-7-2006 and there were two candidates. One was Mr. Kochukuttan Pillai, a Congress (I) candidate and the other was the petitioner himself, also a member belonging to that party. In the election Mr. Kochukuttan Pillai secured 9 votes as against 12 votes secured by the petitioner. Of ...

Varghese Yohannan Vs. the Kerala State Election Commission and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(2)KLJ970

Antony Dominic, J.1. Petitioners challenge Ext. P7 orders passed by the 1st respondent, the Kerala State Election Commission, disqualifying them under section 36 read with section 35(p) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. The impugned orders were rendered on the basis that the petitioners, being conveners, had failed to convene the meetings of the Grama Sabha, as required of them under Section 3(3) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act.2. The facts of the case are that, the petitioners are members elected from Ward Nos 5 and 6 of Akalakunnam Grana Panchayat and were sworn in on 3-10-2005. The President was elected on 6-10-2005 and the first meeting of the Panchayat was held on 14-10-2005.3. In so far as the issue raised in these writ petitions is concerned, it needs to be noticed that the first meeting of the Grama Sabha in so far as Ward No. 5 was held on 28-1-2006 and the second meeting was held on 27-8-2006. In so far as Ward No. 6 is concerned, the first meeting was held on 13-1-2006 and th...

Prabhakaran P.P. Vs. James and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009ACJ882; AIR2008Ker229; 2008(3)KLJ246

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the registered owner of the Tractor, which was involved in the accident that led to death of a child and award of compensation in favour of the parents. The accident was caused by 3rd respondent, who had a licence to drive light motor vehicles. The accident occurred on 17/11/1995. The MACT noticed that at the time of accident, the driver was authorised to drive only light motor vehicles and it is thereafter he got an endorsement in the licence that he was authorised to drive tractor with effect from 18/01/1996 to 17/01/1999. Since the endorsement in the driving licence authorising the licence to drive tractor was made after the date of accident, the Tribunal held that the Insurance Company after remitting compensation can recover the amount from the owner of the tractor as it was entitled to disown liability under the policy for want of licence for the driver of the vehicle, who caused the accident.2. Learned Counsel for the appel...

Valsala J. Vs. the Corporate Manager, All Csi Schools in Malabar and W ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(3)KLJ99

K.T. Sankaran, J.1. The petitioner, while working as Sanskrit Teacher in B.E.M.U.P. School, Thrikkederi, Ottapalam under the corporate management of the first respondent, was placed under suspension by the first respondent, Manager, as per Ext.P5 order dated 17.12.2007, for a period of fifteen days from 18.12.2007. The Assistant Educational Officer refused to approve the order of suspension. The Assistant Educational Officer passed Ext.P6 order dated 28.12.2007, holding thus:.During the investigation the charges against the delinquent teacher was not established by the Corporate Manager.xxxxxxxxxIn the above circumstances there is valid ground for suspension of Smt. J. Valsala, Skt. Teacher, BEMUP School, Trikkateri. The request of the manager to keep the teacher away from work deserves no consideration. Hence I direct you to reinstate Smt. J. Valsala, Skt. Teacher in service forthwith. This order is issued under Rule 67(8) of Chapter 14 KKER.(in the above quoted portion of the order, ...

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shaju Joseph and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009ACJ2254

J.B. Koshy, J.1. This appeal is filed by the insurance company against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in a claim petition filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (in short 'the Act'). The son of claimant Nos. 1 and 2 (respondent Nos. 5 and 6 in this appeal) sustained fatal injuries in a motor accident on 9.2.2004. According to the claimants, while deceased was proceeding on a motor cycle bearing registration No. KL 7-U 8423 from Thodupuzha to Vazhakulam for official purpose, a bus bearing registration No. KL 6-8647 stopped ahead of the motor cycle all of a sudden and thereby it hit on the left back side of the bus and he sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the injuries. According to the claimants, the bus driver was negligent. The driver, owner and insurer of the bus were arrayed as respondent Nos. 1 to 3. The respondent No. 4 was the owner of the motor cycle and respondent No. 5 was the insurer of the motor cycle in which the deceased was travelling...