Court : Kerala
Decided on : Feb-15-1989
Reported in : II(1989)ACC75; 1990ACJ231
..... bus. the quantum of damages awarded is also challenged as excessive. both these contentions are not open to the insurer, in view of the specific provisions of section 96(2) of the motor vehicles act. there is, therefore, no merit in the appeal at the instance of the third respondent insurer.4. counsel for the claimant in support of the memorandum of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Feb-09-1989
Reported in : (1989)IILLJ119Ker
..... the officers and employees of the authority shall be governed by rules made by the government from time to time. this is mentioned in section 8(3) of the act. section 19 provides for transfer of government employees to the authority. it says that every person who was employed in the public health engineering department ..... does not state that an employee of the local authority is a government servant. it is true that the water authority is a local authority under section 3 of the act. but its employees do not become government servants even invoking the definition clause in the kerala civil services (classification, control and appeal) rules. moreover ..... he also relies on certain provisions contained in the kerala civil services (classification, control and appeal) rules, 1960 in support.5. it is under section 3 of the act that the government have constituted 'an autonomous authority to be called the kerala water authority'. the authority is a body corporate having perpetual succession and a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-13-1989
Reported in : [1989]177ITR458(Ker)
..... a. v. thomas and co. v. cit : [1977]110itr515(ker) , and held that the entire dividend is excludable. the revenue filed applications under section 256(1) of the income-tax act to refer certain questions of law for the decision of this court. it was rejected. thereafter, these original petitions were filed by the revenue.we heard counsel ..... reserve should be included in the computation of capital. similarly, it was argued that the tribunal overlooked the impact of section 80a, which was introduced with retrospective effect from 1-4-1968 by the finance (no. 2) act, 1980, and which has now been fully explained by the supreme court in the supreme court in the decision in ..... question no. 1 is a referable question of law. regarding question no. 2, we are of the view that the impact of section 80a introduced in the income-tax with effect from april 1, 1968, by the finance (no. 2) act, 1980, and the impact of he decision of the supreme court in distributors (baroda) p. ltd., case : [1985]155itr120( .....
Tag this Judgment!