Court : Kerala
Reported in : [2003]129TAXMAN335(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.M.The scope and ambit of section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as amended by the Finance Act. 1995 arise for consideration in these appeals. All these writ appeals arise from a common judgment of the learned Single Judge in O.P. No. 30610 of 2002 and connected cases. The petitioners in the writ petitions are the appellants. All the appellants are either co-operative societies or co-operative banks registered under the Co-operative Societies Act. Being aggrieved by a communication of the nature of Ext.P2 in O.P. No. 30610 of 2002 received from the Income Tax Authority having jurisdiction over the petitioners calling for information such as a list of persons, who have made term/recurring deposits of Rs. 50,000 and above as on date along with their complete postal addresses, etc. they have filed the writ petitions. In the notice it is stated that the information is required in connection with the investigation of the appellants c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Ashok Bhushan, C.J. 1. All these Writ Appeals have been filed against the common judgment dated 12.11.2014 delivered by a learned Single Judge in W.P(C) No.2241 of 2012 and other connected Writ Petitions. All the Writ Petitions have been allowed by the learned Single Judge, aggrieved by which judgment respondents to the Writ Petitions have come up in these Writ Appeals. 2. The Writ Appeals can be divided into three groups: The first group consists of Writ Appeal Nos.1 and 2 of 2015 filed by the Kerala Forest Research Institute (for short, 'the KFRI ) which Institute was the 3rd respondent in W.P(C) No.2241 of 2012 and W.P(C) No.25584 of 2011. The second group consists of W.A. Nos.4, 5, 7, 10, 21, 32 of 2015 and 1992 of 2014 filed by the Kerala State Council for Science and Technology and Environment and others. The third group consists of the Writ Appeals filed by the State being W.A. Nos.1313, 1526, 1578, 1628, 1651 and 1755 of 2015 challenging the same judgment. By the judgment dated...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
JUDGMENT 1. Petitioner challenges Ext.P1 award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Alappuzha. The dispute referred for adjudication was whether the demand for regularisation of the employees of the H.M.T. canteen as regular employees of H.M.T. Ltd. is justified. 2. The H.M.T. canteen is run by a Co-operative Society formed in the year 1985. It is alleged that the employees of the canteen that the Society is under the control of the H.M.T.Ltd, the Management. The employees of the canteen were workers in employment of the canteen even prior to the formation of the Society. After formation of the Society the Managing Committee of the Society is managed by H.M.T Ltd. The Managing Committee consists of four persons to be elected from general body and four persons from officers of the Management. Hence according to them, the employees of the canteen cannot be treated as employees of the Society but they are in effect employees of H.M.T Ltd. (Management). 3. The Management contended that the S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (2009)19VST396(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. These connected cases are filed challenging penalty levied under Section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 for evasion of tax by the petitioners for the assessment years 1993-94 to 1996-97. The nature of transactions and the findings based on which penalty is levied on all the petitioners are the same and therefore, there is no need to go to the separate orders challenged in each of the original petitions. Exhibit P3 challenged in O. P. No. 23869 of 1999 is the very same order under challenge in O.P. No. 24838 of 1999 because the said order is common for both the petitioners. Since the findings in exhibit P3 are illustrative of the case pertaining to all the petitioners and orders passed in the other cases are on same lines, I proceed to dispose of the cases by considering the challenge against exhibit P3.2. Counsel appearing for all the petitioners in the connected cases, counsel appearing for the society involved and the Government Pleader are...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2010(1)KLT352
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The fourth respondent, while a member of a credit society 'A', became a member of another credit society 'B', the third respondent. The petitioner, a member of 'B' society complained to the first respondent Joint Registrar. This Court issued Ext.P5 judgment directing the first respondent to complete the proceedings. Ext.P6 was issued by the first respondent holding that though the fourth respondent was a member of 'A' society when he became member of 'B' society, he has since ceased to be a member of 'A' society and therefore, ends of justice do not require his removal from membership of 'B' society. This is under challenge.2. That societies 'A' and 'B' are credit societies to which Rule 17 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969, hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules', applies, is not disputed. The fourth respondent, admittedly, became member of the 'B' society, while he was a member of 'A' society. He applied to 'A' society and his membershi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1964Ker176
K.K. Mahilw, J.1. These appeals arise from the decrees in O. S. 477 of 1955 and 495 of 1955 respectively on the me of the Munsiff's Court, Palghat. Both these cases were tried together and the evidence was taken in O.S. 477 of 1355. The Valappad (Co-operative Stores Ltd., a society registered under the Madras Co-operative Societies Act (Act VI of 1932) hereinafter called the Society is ttie cetenaant in both cases. The two suits were instituted tor recovery or money by the two different plaintiffs for the purchase of goods by the Society from them. The bills on which the claim of the plaintiff in O.S. 477 of 1955 was based are Exts. B-1 to B-3 dated 11-4-1955 and those on which claim oT the plaintiff in O.S. 495 of 1955 was based are txts. B-35 to B-37 dated 9-3-1955. The case of the plaintiffs was that the Society purchased goods from them and was Indebted for the amounts claimed in the respective plaints.2. The substantial defence raised by the defendant was that the Secretary of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [2002(95)FLR1137]; (2002)IIILLJ459Ker
M.R. Hariharan Nair, J.1. Can the termination of service of Clerks engaged on daily wages on completion of the particular work for which they were engaged in a Co-operative Bank be taken as 'retrenchment' justifying interference by the Labour Court? This is the main question that arises for decision in the present case.2. The 1st respondent herein was engaged by a Branch Manager of the petitioner - Bank (Peroorkada Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., Thiruvananthapuram) for casual works relating to audit and finalisation of annual accounts on daily wages for the period from 16.4.1986 till 27.6.86 and from 16.10.1987 to 13.3.1989. The 2nd respondent worked likewise during the period from 16.4.1986 to 5.7.1986 and from 16.10.1987 to 11.3.1989. They were not allowed to work for further periods. Aggrieved by the denial of work, they approached the Labour Court, Kollam and as per Ext. P4 award passed in I.D. No. 90/90 the Manager's contentions were turned down and it was directed that the said ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2003(1)KLT153
R. Basant, J. 1. How is inter se seniority to be determined between two employees of a Cooperative Society when there is no rule or term of employment specifically covering the situation? This is a question that falls for determination in these appeals.2. W.A. No. 2086/1982 arises from the judgment in O.P. No. 11330/1995. The learned single Judge found that in the absence of any or term of employment, the date of actual commencement of service alone has to be reckoned as the crucial input. The Original Petition filed by the appellant challenging the decision of the Co-operative Tribunal was dismissed.3. By the impugned common judgment, O.P. No. 14396 of 1995 was also disposed of by the learned single Judge. In the said Original Petition, the 6th respondent in this appeal had challenged the finding in the judgment of the Co-operative Tribunal in so far as it was against her. The Co-operative Tribunal had held that in the absence of rules, regulations, bye-laws etc. it is the rank on mer...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [2002(95)FLR1142]; (2003)ILLJ236Ker
R. Rajendra Babu, J. 1. Petitioner, Government Servants Co-operative-Society Limited No. 130, Wadakkancherry, filed this original petition for an order quashing Exhibit P1 award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Alappuzha in I.D. No. .49/90. 2. Petitioner is a co-operative society registered under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. It was alleged that the above society had got an authorised staff pattern and the employees were appointed in the clerical cadre in accordance with the qualifications prescribed under the Statute. The second respondent Smt.C.S. Shakeela Begum was engaged as an apprentice with effect from January 4, 1978 and she was continuing as such. In 1982 the Reserve Bank of India in its Inspection Report objected the engagement of the second respondent. Accordingly she was terminated front service with effect from October 1, 1982. The above order was challenged by the second respondent by filing an arbitration case and the above case was dismissed...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2003(2)KLT1032
M. Ramachandran, J.1. By Ext. P1 notification dated 24.09.2001, the petitioner, a Service Co-operative Bank, had invited applications for appointment to an existing vacancy of salesman. It had been indicated that selection would be on the basis of a written test and interview. The post has been reserved to be filled up by member of a Scheduled Caste. The averments in the Original Petition indicate that a test had been held, but before the appointment could be made a stay had been issued by the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Kollam.2. The petitioner had challenged the orders by filing O.P. No. 827 of 2002. It had been disposed of on 8.1.2002 directing the Joint Registrar to consider the matter appropriately and orders passed thereon. By Ext. P3 dated 22.3.2002, the Joint Registrar had cancelled the entire proceedings taken up for recruitment. An appeal thereupon had been preferred before the Government. However, the Government had upheld the orders passed by the departmental ...
Tag this Judgment!