Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1964Ker287
ORDERC.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. In this batch of 14 writ petitions, the pen-tinners, though different, who are all owners of forest lands in the area, commonly known as the Malabar area, attack the group of four Sections, namely, Sections 48 to 51, contained in Chapter VII of the Kerala Forest Act, 1951, (Act IV of 1962), hereinafter to be referred to as the Kerala Act, as unconstitutional and as Infringing the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 19(1) (f) and (g), and 31 of the Constitution. The State of Kerala is the main respondent in most of these writ petitions, though in some of them some of the officers of the Forest Department have also been included as additional respondents.2. Though the averments contained in all these writ petitions are slightly different, all the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, as well as the learned Gov-ernment Pleader appearing for the State, have agreed to treat the averments contained in O. P. No. 1108/62 as well...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1971Ker98
Raman Nayar, C.J. 1. The Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (Act 1 of 1964) as originally enacted (the original Act as we shall call it) finds a place in the NinthSchedule to the Constitution -- see Item 39 -- and therefore has the protection of Article 31-B. It has been amended three times, first by Act 12 of 1966, then by Act 9 of 1967, and now by Act 55 of 1969, the amendments made by the last mentioned Act (which we shall call the amending Act) being far-reaching. (To the 132 sections in the original Act, over 50 new sections have been added while over 60 sections have been amended. To the 62 definitions 10 have been added while 20 have been amended. The amended Act is therefore virtually a new piece of legislation). The first of these was enacted by the President while the remaining two have received his as sent -- it has been contended not in the free and proper exercise of his judgment, but, of course, we cannot go into that-- but none of them has been included in the Ninth Schedule....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [2005]272ITR230(Ker)
G. Sasidharan J.1. This is a petition filed by the 4th accused in Crime No. 102 of 2003, of Guruvayoor Police Station. The crime was registered against the petitioner and the other accused under sections 41(1)(d) and 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code. On March 20, 2003, the Circle Inspector of Police, Guruvayoor, intercepted an ambassador car in which accused Nos. 1 to 3 were travelling and seized Rs. 52 lakhs which was suspected to have been stolen. Accused Nos. 1 to 3 said that the money belonged to the petitioner and hence he was also made an accused in the crime.2. On conducting investigation it was found that the currency notes seized were not stolen property and police filed a report to that effect in the court of the Magistrate. According to the petitioner, the money seized is his business income. The Assistant Director of Income-tax (Investigation), Thrissur, filed C. M. P. No. 4056 of 2003 in the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Chavakkad, stating that the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2006(2)KLT654
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The question that is posed for consideration in these cases is whether the amount of penalty could be recovered under Section 142 (1) (c) (i) of the Customs Act read with the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act against the personal properties left behind by the defaulters for an offence of smuggling which is against the national interest? 2. Petitioners in O.P. Nos. 21354 of 1999 and 28882 of 2002 are the son and daughter of one late Kallatra Abdul Khader Haji and the petitioner in O.P.No. 20917 of 1999 is the wife of one late M.B. Moosa. The reliefs sought for in all the Original Petitions are identical. Petitioners have sought for a declaration that they are not liable to pay the penalty due from their predecessors' interest and that the movable and immovable properties are not liable to be proceeded with for the recovery of the amounts due from late Abdul Khader Haji and Moosa respectively. 3. Customs Authorities had intercepted a fishing boat on 22.3.1974 from Neel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [2007]8STT33; (2007)7VST323(Ker)
K. Balakrishnan Nair J.1. The constitutional validity of Sub-section (16A) of Section 47 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and the sustainability of two circulars issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes under the said provision are the points, that arise for decision in these writ petitions. Since same points arise for decision in all these writ petitions, they are heard and disposed of by this common judgment. W.P. (C) No. 2844 of 2007 is treated as the main case.W.P. (C) No. 2844 of 2007:2. The petitioner, which is a firm, is a dealer in glass sheets. It is an asses-see on the files of the third respondent, Sales Tax Officer, Manjeri, under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the KVAT Act') and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The fourth respondent, Commissioner of Commercial Taxes issued Circular No. 50 of 2006, in exercise of his powers under Clause (c) of Sub-section (2) of Section 3 read with Sub-section (16A) of Section 47 of the KVAT A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN MONDAY,THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2013 10TH ASHADHA, 1935 OP (CAT).No. 568 of 2013 (Z) ---------------------------------------- [O.A.NO.684/2012 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH DATED 01 01-2013] ........ PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. S.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (S.C.B), LAVANYA, CHAVADINADA, VENGANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 523.2. K.K.RAJAN, INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (S.C.B), KAILASAM, GURUDEV NAGAR, AYATHIL P.O., KOLLAM-691 017. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, NEW DELHI - 3.2. DIRECTOR, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, C.G.O COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-3.3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION), C.B.I HEAD QUARTERS, 5-B, 7TH FLOO...
Tag this Judgment!