Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1957]8STC854(Ker)
1. The petitioner is a tobacco licensee (A class) whose turnover has been estimated at Rs. 1,20,000 in respect of the accounting period, 1st January, 1952,10 31st March, 1952, and at Rs.6,24,000 in respect of the accounting period, 1st April, 1952, to 31st March, 1953. The correctness of the estimate is not disputed and the petitioner admits liability to sales tax 'at the rate of three pies for every Indian rupee in such turnover' as directed by Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Travancore-Cochin' General Sales Tax Act, 1125.2. Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Travancore-Cochin General Sales Tax Act, 1125, provides :-Subject as aforesaid, the sale of any of the goods mentioned below shall be subject to a tax at the rate specified in respect thereof, at such single point in the series of sales by successive dealers as may be prescribed ; and the tax shall be paid by the dealer concerned on his turnover in each year relating to such goods and shall be in addition to the tax to which...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1957Ker10
M.S. Menon, J.1. The 3rd plaintiff (additional) in O. S No. 112 of 1095 of the District Court of Kottayarn is the appellant before us. In execution of the decree in the suit the appellant applied for delivery of one acre of property in survey plot No. 201/1 of the Kanjirappally North Pakuthy together with the building thereon. The contentions of the respondent (102nd defendant) as summarised by the court below are:'That the 35th defendant, his father, had no rights over the property even on the date of the suit, that the 35th defendant has gifted this property under Ext. I to himself and his mother on 3--6--1095, long before the suit, that the mother Jn turn gifted her rights over the property to him under Ext. II in 1101, that ever since that date, he is in possession of the property in his own independent title, that neither he nor his mother' was a party to this decree, that the decree is not binding on him and his property and that there, fore the plaintiff is not entitled to get p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1958]33ITR106(Ker)
VARADARAJA IYENGAR, J. - This is a petition under article 226 of the Constitution field by an assessee under the Income-tax Act and calling in question a rectification order passed by the respondent, Income-tax Officer, Alleppy.2. The petitioner was assessed for the year 1123 under the Travancore Act on 30th July, 1952, by the Income-tax Officer, by accepting the book version of the profits in the Alleppey and Trivandrum branches and adding a sum of Rs. 7,000 in respect of the Kottayam branch. A sum of Rs. 21,134 which was claimed as speculation loss in oil and pepper was also disallowed. After an unsuccessful appeal as regards the disallowance of the loss, before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the petitioner took the matter before the Commissioner under section 46(2) of the Travancore Act. The Commissioner, by his order dated 18th August, 1951, found that the set-off of the loss required re-investigation and so he set aside the assessment and remitted the matter with a directio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1958Ker380
Varadaraja Iyengar, J.1. These two appeals arise respectively out of two connected suits O. S. 183 of 1123 and O. S. 154 of 1124 on the file of the Trichur District Court relating to a contract of hire of an engine. The plaintiffs 1 and 2 and the sole defendant in both the suits are the same. The common 2nd plaintiff is the appellant in both the appeals.2. The plaintiffs 1 and 2, Sankaran and. Raman Ezhuthassan were the owners of a 12--14 H. P. Stcn Hornsby Engine having purchased it second-hand and were working their 'Sivaram Rice Mill Vilangan'' therewith. They gave this engine and its accessories on hire to the defendant Devassy, under Ext. A agreement executed by him on 14-51123, for a period of three months commencing 15-5-1123 for purpose of draining water from certain 'Kole Nilam.'Under Ext. A terms the defendant had to pay towards hire a total sum of Rs. 900/- of which ene-half was payable at date of agreement and the other half a month later, on 15-6-1123, The defendant acknow...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1957Ker134; 1957CriLJ1127; (1959)ILLJ28Ker
Sankaran, J.1. The accused in Calendar Case No. 1/1955 on the file of the Special Judge's Court at Coimbatore is the appellant. The Principal Assistant Sessions Judge at Coimbatore was appointed as the Special Judge for trying cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act (Act II of 1947) and it was in that capacity as Special Judge that the case against the accused was tried. The accused is an employee under the Southern Railway and was functioning as the Assistant Goods Clerk attached to the Kasargode railway station during the relevant period i. e., between. 25-8-1954 and 13-10-1954.On getting information that he was in the habit of receiving illegal gratification from persons who had to consign goods from the Kasargode railway station to other places, P. W. 15 the Special Police Sub-Inspector attached to the Special Police establishment, Madras, proceeded to investigate into the matter after obtaining the necessary sanction and filed a charge-sheet against the accused.When the case ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1958Ker15
M.S. Menon J.1. This second appeal questions the executability of the ex parte decree in O. S. No. 421 of 1950 of the Munsiff's Court of Palghat in the Court of the District Munsiff at Perumbavoor. The suit was instituted in the Palghat Court on 7-11-1950 and decreed on 3-1-1951. The execution application concerned is E. P. No. 599 of 1951 dated 20-11-1951.2. The contention of the appellant (defendant) is that the Munsiff's Court of Palghat should be considered a 'foreign Court' and that when so considered the decree is incapable of execution by the Munsiff's Court at Perumbavoor on the basis of the well known canon of Private Inernational Law which was summarised as follows in Gurdayal Singh v. Rajah of Faridkot, 21 Ind App 171 (A) :'In a personal action ... .a decree pronounced in absentem by a foreign Court, to the jurisdiction of which the Defendant has not in any way submitted himself, is by international law an absolute nullity. He is under no obligation of any kind to obey it; a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1958Ker322
Varadaraja Iyengar, J. 1. This appeal is by the plaintiffs and it arises out of a suit instituted by them as vendees of immovable property against the vendor for damages for fraudulent misrepresentation as to title to the property sold and also for enforcement of a covenant of indemnity contained in the sale deed.2. The property in question which is scheduled as item 1 to the plaint is a garden land 78 cents in extent in Edava Pakuthy in Chirayinkil Taluk Along with other properties it was the subject-matter of a partition suit O. S. 705 of 1105 on the file of the Attingal Munsiff's Court, among the members of an Ezhava tarwad, who are represented in this suit as defendants 1 to 34. Defendants 29 to 34 who were the plaintiffs in that suit, claimed the property to be common tarwad property and as such available for partition while the 1st defendant set up the exclusive title of his sakha comprising the defendants 1 to 3.According to the 1st defendant it was an acquisition of Kurumpa Nac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1958Ker326
K.T. Koshi, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit on a mortgage bond, and the only question raised in the appeal is whether or not the suit was instituted within twelve years from the date on which the money sued for became due.2. The bond bears the date 27-3-1909 and was in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of the two plaintiffs in the suit and defendants 7 to 9. The mortgagor and the mortgagee belonged to Kasaragod Taluk and the bond is in Kanarese. The principal amount borrowed was Rs. 7800/-. Interest for the loan was fixed at Rs. 456-4-9 per year to be paid by the 30th Phalguna of every year beginning from Saumya (1909-1910). The mortgage money was repayable after twenty years and within thirty years.Some time after the execution of the mortgage, the mortgagor sold the equity of redemption over the mortgaged properties to a stranger and the latter in his turn sold the same to four persons, of whom defendant 1 was one, and his uncle, the predecessor-in-interest of defendants ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1958Ker41; 1958CriLJ177
Raman Nayar, J.1. These appeals by the State against the acquittal of the same accused persons in two different cases raise the question whether there can be a general meeting under Section 76(1) of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, of a Company consisting only of one member. The 1st accused in both the cases is the Company itself, a private company as it happens to be, and the 2nd accused is the managing-director of the Company who, at the relevant time, was its sole member.In one case the prosecution was for an offence under Section 76(2) of the Companies Act for failure to hold a general meeting in the' year 1953 as required by Section 76(1); in the other, it wag for an offence under Section 133(3) read with Section 131 for failure to lay before the Company in general meeting a balance-sheet and profit and loss account in the same year; and in both the liability depends upon whether Section 76(1) enjoins such a meeting in the case of a one-man company or, perhaps, to put it more corre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1958Ker251
K.T. Koshi, C.J. 1. These three appeals have been placed before us for orders as to whether their proper venue is this Court, or the respective District Courts to which the courts which passed the judgments and decrees appealed against are subordinate. The question has arisen on account of the provision in Section 13 of the Kerala Civil Courts Act, 1957 (President's Act No. 1 of 1957) that 'where the amount or value of the subject matter of the suit does not exceed seven thousand and five hundred Rupees, from the original decrees and orders of a Subordinate Judge's Court shall, when such appeals are allowed by law, lie to the District Court'.The Kerala Civil Courts Act repealed the Madras Civil Courts Act, 1873 (Madras Act 111 of 1873), as in force in the Malabar District referred to in Sub-Section (2) of Section 5 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 (XXXVII of 1956), and the Travancore-Cochin Civil Courts Act, 1951 (XXII of 1951). The Kerala Civil Courts Act was enacted by the Pres...
Tag this Judgment!