Court : Kerala
Reported in : (2008)13VST64(Ker)
ORDERH.L. Dattu, C.J.1. This revision petition is filed questioning the legality or otherwise of the orders passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T. A. No. 552 of 2002 dated April 29, 2003. The assessment year in question is 1988-89.2. The assessee is engaged in the business of running a photo processing lab. According to the assessee, his activity is confined to taking of photographs of customers and delivering their photographs. This activity, according to the assessee, is a skilled labour, which is not exigible to tax.3. The assessee had filed his annual returns before the assessing authority. The same is rejected by the assessing authority. After such rejection, the assessing authority had issued a pre-assessment notice, proposing certain turnovers to be exigible to tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The view of the assessing authority is that the activity of the assessee would come within the meaning of the expression '...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2008CriLJ573; 2007(3)KLJ264
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. This case has been placed before us on a reference by Justice R. Basant after having noticed some incongruity between the decisions of the Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Najakat : 2001CriLJ2588 and a Division Bench decision of this Court in Chacko v. State of Kerala : 2003(2)KLT964 wherein Najakat's case was not referred to. Learned Judge expressed doubts as to how the observations made in paragraph 8 of the decision in Najakat's case are to be understood and applied in the light of the decision in Chacko's case.2. Question centres round the methodology to be applied by the criminal courts when a plea of set off is claimed under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in short 'the Code'. Fair procedure is the soul Article 21 and the essence of Section 428 of the Code flows from that Article. Prison justice is also the concern of the convicting courts and judicial warrant which deprives one's life and liberty should also satisfy the test of fai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR2008Ker24
V. Giri, J.1. Petitioner, who was an agent of the Life Insurance Corporation, from 1980 onwards, challenges the termination of his agency coupled with forfeiture of the renewal commission, as ordered originally by the first respondent and affirmed by the Appellate Authority and Chairman. The appointment of a person as agent of the Life Insurance Corporation and consequently the termination of his agency, with or without the forfeiture of the renewal commission that the agent is entitled to is effected under Statutory Regulations called as 'Life Insurance Corporation of India (Agents) Rules 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The said Rules are framed by the Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 49 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India Act, 1956. An interesting question as regards the scope of Rule 19 of the Rules in the context of forfeiture of the renewal commission that is due to the agent has come up for consideration in this writ petition...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2007(3)KLJ676
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant was the first accused. He was alleged to have killed his mother and sister. Since appellant was financially not able to engage a lawyer, State appointed a lawyer before the trial court and this Court under the legal aid scheme. As per the final report, police charged originally accused, his mother Chandrika and father of the accused under Section 302, 306 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After perusing the records, court charged the appellant alone under Section 302 IPC as mother, original A2, died and it was recorded as abated. The allegation of the prosecution was that appellant Rajesh (A1), his mother Chandrika (A2), father of the appellant (A3) and deceased Raji, sister of the appellant were residing in House No. A.P. X/506 of Anad Village. Father used to abuse ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2008CriLJ523
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant was the first accused. He was alleged to have killed his mother and sister. Since appellant was financially not able to engage a lawyer, State appointed a lawyer before the trial Court and this Court under the legal aid scheme. As per the final report, police charged originally accused, his mother Chandrika and father of the accused under Sections 302, 306 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After perusing the records, Court charged the appellant alone under Section 302, IPC as mother, original A2, died and it was recorded as abated. The allegation of the prosecution was that appellant Rajesh (A1), his mother Chandrika (A2), father of the appellant (A3) and deceased Raji, sister of the appellant were residing in House No. A.P. X/506 of Anad Village. Father used to abus...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : II(2008)DMC132; ILR2008(2)Kar1432; 2008(5)KLJ50; 2008(2)KCCR929; 2008(3)AIRKarR96; 2008CriLJ2490; 2008(3)AICLR396(DB)
Manjula Chellur, J.1. This is yet another case involving a young lady who has left this world at the age of 25 years leaving behind a tender aged son by name Rakesh that too when she was pregnant of 20 weeks. The State has come up with this appeal challenging the judgment and Order of acquittal, wherein the respondents were tried for offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and also Sections 498A and 304B of IPC.2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:It is not in dispute that the deceased-Rekha was affectionately called as Baby by her kith and kin married the 1st respondent/accused on 5.6.1991. The relationship inter se between the respondents i.e. accused No. 1 being the son of accused Nos. 2 and 3, and accused No. 4 being the son-in-law of accused Nos. 2 and 3 is not in dispute. The relationship of deceased-Rekha with P. W. 6-mother, P.W. 7-first cousin and P.Ws. 9 and 19-maternal uncles is no t in dispute. It is also not in dispute th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2008(1)KLJ312
Radhakrishnan, J.1. We are in these cases concerned with the interpretation of Rule 5(b) of the Special Rules for the Kerala Dental Education Service, 1975 read with Rule 10(ab) of Part II of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958.2. O.P. No. 2306 of 2001 was preferred by the appellant in W.A. No. 1893 of 2002 seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P8 revised select list by which fourth respondent was granted the date of assignment in the cadre of Assistant Professor earlier than the petitioner accepting her plea that she had acquired the qualification earlier than the petitioner when the vacancy in the post of Assistant Professor arose on 1-5-1988. Petitioner was appointed as Tutor in Dentistry on 26-07-1978 as per the advice Of the Kerala Public Service Commission dated 4-7-1978. Fourth respondent was also advised by the Public Service Commission for the post of Tutor in Dentistry on 20-7-1981. At the time of joining duty petitioner possessed BDS qualification presc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2007(4)KLT791
H.L. Dattu, C.J.1. State Government is the appellant in this appeal. Respondent No. 1 is the contesting private respondent. Respondent No. 2 is a formal party.2. The State Government has informed the private respondent that his term as a member of the Syndicate of the 2nd respondent - Cochin University of Science and Technology, Cochin has expired and therefore, he has to vacate his seat as a member of the Syndicate of the University. However, the private contesting respondent is of the view that he can continue to sit and occupy the Chair as a member of the Syndicate. The tussle between the State Government and the first respondent has reached the High Court in the form of a writ petition filed by the private respondent. Learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and thereby has permitted the private respondent to continue to occupy his chair as a member of the Syndicate of the second respondent University. The result of the writ petition has brought the State Government befor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (2009)20VST72(Ker)
K.T. Sankaran, J.1. The questions involved in this Writ Appeal are : (1) To attract Section 26-A of the Kerala General Sales Tax, is it necessary that a demand for collection of arrears of Sales Tax be made? (2) Whether the assignees of an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, which transaction is hit by Section 26-A, could claim that they are bonafide transferees so as to avoid the rigour of Section 26-A? (3) Whether before Revenue Recovery sale, the person in possession could be directed to vacate the house in the property sought to be sold2. The parties are referred to hereunder as per their rank in the Writ Petition. The 4th respondent firm, M/s Marvel Industries, is an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. Respondents 5 and 6 are the partners of the firm. The counter affidavit filed by the Assistant Commissioner (law) holding the charge of the Joint Commissioner (Law), Department of Commercial Taxes, in the Writ Appeal reveals that the 4th respondent firm is ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2007(4)KLT620
ORDERV. Ramkumar, J.1. The revision petitioner, who is the complainant in S.T. No. 143/06 on the file of JFCM-II, Haripad, challenges the order dated 5.2.07 passed by the said Magistrate returning the complaint presumably under Section 201 Cr.P.C. for presenting a same before the proper court having jurisdiction within two weeks.2. The above private complaint was filed against the first respondent accused alleging the commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in respect of a cheque bearing No. 509004 drawn on the Pallickal Branch of the State Bank of India for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- allegedly issued by the accused to discharge his liability towards a loan said to have been availed by him from the revision petitioner/complainant.3. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and recorded the sworn statement of the complainant and took the case on file as S.T. No. 143/2006. On receipt of summons, the accused entered appearance. The...
Tag this Judgment!