Kerala Court November 2009 Judgments

Pathanamthitta District Railway, Vs. Union of India (Uoi),

Court: Kerala

A.K. Basheer, J.1. This Writ Petition, as pro bono publico, has been filed by Pathanamthitta District Railway Passengers Action Council and two other local residents seeking the following reliefs:(a) Issue a writ of prohibition or appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the railway authorities to restrain from going ahead with the proposed construction of the cement yard at Thiruvalla railway station for the purpose of unloading of cement bags from the goods wagons and transportation of the same into the lorries/other transportation vehicles. 2. The grievance of the petitioners, as projected in the writ petition, is that an attempt is now being made by the Railway Authorities for acquiring nearby lands adjoining the Thiruvalla railway station for formation of a separate cement yard for loading and unloading of several thousand bags of cement by extension of the existing railway track causing extensive damage to the life and health of not only the travelling public but also to t...

C. Sebastian S/O Charles Vs. the State of Kerala,

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2010Ker75

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The appeal is filed against judgment of the learned Single Judge holding that appellant is liable to pay arrears of motor vehicle tax in respect of a Tempo Traveller bearing registration No. KL-01/C-1497 for the period from 1.7.1996 to 2.2.1999. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellant, Standing Counsel appearing for the financier-4th respondent and the Government Pleader for the other respondents.2. The vehicle was purchased by the appellant under hire purchase arrangement with the additional-4th respondent herein. When appellant defaulted payment of hire charges, vehicle was admittedly repossessed by the 4th respondent on 17.12.1997. As on the date of repossession by the financier, the vehicle was already in arrears of tax for the period commencing from 1.7.1996 onwards. Admittedly the financier did not care to clear the arrears of tax or even file G Form for the period the vehicle was retained by them. Even though vehicle was stated to be sold b...

The South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. Smt. Binu,

Court: Kerala

A.K. Basheer, J.1. This writ appeal illustrates a classic example of sheer abuse of judicial process, and that too at the hands of a financial institution, a scheduled Bank.2. Respondent No. 1 was the successful bidder in a revenue sale held way back in the year 1999. The proceedings were initiated at the instance of Excise authorities for recovery of Abkari kist due from one Subramonian. It is the admitted position that the sale held by the revenue authority was confirmed and sale certificate was issued in favour of respondent No. 1.3. It appears that in 2004 the appellant approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam, for issue of a recovery certificate under Section 31A of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, contending that the subject matter of the revenue sale had been mortgaged by Subramonian in its favour and that a decree had also been obtained against the said mortgagor. However, it is the admitted position that during the pendency of t...

Abraham Thomson Vs. Kunjamma Jeevamony

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2010(1)KLT99

Thomas P. Joseph, J.1. In these Second Appeals the common substantial questions of law which I have framed for a decision are whether the mere fact that a Protestant Christian is liying in Neyyattinkara Taluk (among other Taluks mentioned in Section 30 of the Travancore Christian Succession Act - for short, 'the Act') is sufficient to hold that he is following the customary usage as per which male and female heirs of the intestate would inherit his property in equal proportion and whether the courts below are legally correct in holding that plaintiffs have not proved the customary usage. The contestants in these cases claim title by inheritance to the property of Chadayan Pethiru, a Protestant Christian who lived in Neyyattinkara Taluk. According to the learned Counsel for appellants/plaintiffs fact of such domicile is sufficient to infer, as provided in Section 30 of the Act that Chadayan Pethiru was following that customary usage which Section 30 itself recognised while counsel for r...

Sundaram Finance Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala,

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2010Ker80,2009(4)KLT833

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Appellants which are Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) registered with Reserve Bank of India under Section 45IA of the Reserve Bank of India Act are challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge holding that they are 'money lenders' within the meaning of that term contained in the Kerala Money Lenders Act, 1958 (hereinafter called 'the Act') liable to take licence under Section 3 of the Act for carrying on business in Kerala. Admittedly the appellants/petitioners are engaged in money lending in Kerala. However, their case is that being Non-Banking Financial Companies registered under Section 45IA of the R.B.I. Act, they don't come within the meaning of 'person' contained in the definition clause of 'money lender' under Section 2(7) of the Act. An alternate contention raised by the appellants/petitioners is that even if they fall under the main definition clause as 'persons', they fall within the exception Clause (f) of Section 2(7) of the Act w...

Wilson Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

P.Q. Barkath Ali, J.1. The challenge in this appeal by the accused in SC No. 361/2004 of Sessions Court, Kozhikode (the appellant herein) is to the judgment dated March 15, 2005 convicting him under Sections 449, 302 and 392 read with Section 397 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 of IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 8 years under Section 449 of IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 7 years under Section 392 read with Section 397 of IPC. The sentences are ordered to run concurrently.2. The case of the prosecution as testified by Pws.1 to 19 before the lower court in brief is this:PW.1 is the husband of deceased Mary @ Mamy. They were residing in House No. 8/461 in Erappanthottil of Koorachundu panchayat. PW.1 is an agriculturist and is the president of the local Rubber Board. On January 4, 2003, in the evening he went to Erappanthode where he was constructing a house. At about 7 - 7.30 p.m. he went to the nearby toddy shop and bought a bott...

Kerala State Pharmacy Council Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2010(2)KLT200

Antony Dominic, J.1. The petitioner is the Kerala State Pharmacy Council constituted under the provisions of Chapter III of the Pharmacy Act, 1948.2. In this Writ Petition, the prayer sought is to quash Exts.P4 & P5 and to direct the First respondent to accept Ext.P6 and pass orders thereon.3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that, by order dated 30.7.2005 Shri. B. Vasanthakumaran was appointed as Registrar of the petitioner. While he was continuing in Office, by Ext.R1(a), with effect from 31.5.2008, the age of retirement was reduced from 60 to 58. Shri. B. Vasanthakumaran attained 58 years on 15.7.2008, and therefore, the Government issued order dated 21.8.2008 directing the petitioner to relieve Shri. B. Vasanthakumaran.4. It would appear that immediately thereafter the petitioner on its own, appointed Shri. D. Sunilkumar as its Registrar, and sought approval of the 1st respondent. However, on the ground that the appointment was made without complying with the provisions of...

Perinthalmanna Taluk Rural Housing Co-op. Society Vs. Unnikrishnan

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2010(1)KLT124

ORDERS.S. Satheesachandran, J.1. The decree holder in E.P. No. 14 of 2004 in A.R.C. No. 1531 of 2002-03 on the file of the Munsiff Magistrate Court, Perintalmanna is the revision petitioner. Revision is directed against the order dated 29.2.2008 passed by the execution court declining the request made by the decree holder for resale of the property. The decree holder pursuant to permission accorded, purchased the property of the judgment debtor in court auction and the sale was confirmed on 16.11.2004. However, the decree holder failed to produce the stamp paper for issue of sale certificate. Nearly three years later, the decree holder moved an application for setting aside the sale requesting for resale of the property for the reason of non-production of the stamp paper for the issue of sale certificate. The execution court, after hearing the counsel for the decree holder, dismissed that application. Propriety and correctness of that order is challenged in the revision.2. I heard the ...

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Synthite Industrial Chemicals Ltd.

Court: Kerala

Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The only question raised is whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the respondents were entitled to seek for set off of credit available in the previous year's assessment completed under Section 115JAA against assessed tax for the purpose of determination of interest liability under Section 234B and Section 234C of the I.T. Act. In fact, in the course of completion of assessment, the assessing officer allowed set off and worked the interest under Sections 234B and C on the net deficiency. However, the Commissioner in exercise of suo motu revisional power under Section 263 cancelled the assessment against the assessees filed appeals before the Tribunal. We notice that subsequent to the order issued by the Tribunal, there has been a decision of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Jindal Exports Ltd. : (2009) 314 I.T.R. 137 (Del.), followed by the Madras High Court reported in CIT v. Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. : (2009) 314 I.T.R. 231, which are rendered based on ...

P. Kuknhappa Nair and Co. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax and an ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: [2010]322ITR437(Ker)

P.S. Gopinathan, J.1. In a prosecution for offence under Section 277(ii) read with Section 278B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the revision petitioner pleaded guilty before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (EO), Ernakulam in C.C. No. 148 of 1990. The learned Magistrate recorded the plea of guilty. The revision petitioner was accordingly convicted and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 50,000. The revision petitioner preferred Crl. A. No. 241 of 2001. When the criminal appeal came up before the Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Ernakulam, the revision petitioner argued that in the light of the decision in Prem Dass v. ITO : [1999] 236 ITR 683 (SC) : [1999] 5 SCC 241, the charge should not have been framed. After setting aside the conviction and sentence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge remanded the case to the trial court for fresh disposal. Assailing the legality, correctness and propriety of the above order of remand in appeal, this revision petition was filed.2. Having heard either ...