Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: multi state co operative societies act 2002 Sorted by: recent Court: kerala Page 50 of about 497 results (0.217 seconds)

Jun 22 1977 (HC)

A.P. Balakrishnan Nair and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1978Ker30

ORDERGeorge Vadakkel, J.1. The petitioners are the Secretary, Accountant, Senior Clerk and Junior Clerk of the 4th respondent Society and they impugn here the classification of Banking Co-operative Societies with working capital between Rs. 5 lakhs and 10 lakhs into Urban Banks coming under the Banking Regulation Act and Credit Societies for the purpose of regulating the qualification, remuneration, allowances and other conditions of service of officers and servants as contained in Appendix III to the Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969,2. Section 80 (1) of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, 1969 enables the Government to classify the societies governed by the Act according to their type and financial position. Sub-section (3) therein enables the Government to make rules regulating the qualification, remuneration, allowances and other conditions of service of the Officers and servants of different classes of Societies specified in Sub-section (1). Sub-section (2) of the section enabl...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 25 1972 (HC)

Malabar Fruit Products Company and ors. Vs. the Sales Tax Officer and ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1973]30STC537(Ker)

P. Subramonian Poti, J.1. The main question that arises in all these original petitions is one of validity and construction of Section 5A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. All the petitioners are assessees who have been assessed to tax on the purchase turnover of certain goods under Section 5A of the said Act. In some of the petitions, there are other questions also raised. I will first refer to and deal with common questions here.2. Section 5 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), charges to tax the taxable total turnover of every dealer subject to certain conditions, 'Total turnover' has been defined in Section 2(xxvi) of the Act to mean the aggregate turnover in all goods by a dealer at all places of business in the State, whether or not the whole or any portion of such turnover is liable to tax. The taxable turnover of a dealer is the turnover on which he is liable to pay tax as determined after making such deductions and in such ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 15 1971 (HC)

Narayani Amma Karthiyayani Amma and anr. Vs. the State of Kerala and o ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1972Ker93

ORDERM.U. Isaac, J.1. The first petitioner is the mother of the second petitioner. The third respondent, the Multi-purpose Co-operative Society Ltd. No. 1240, Kulasekharapuram, obtained an award against the first petitioner for a sum of Rs. 826, and against the 2nd petitioner for a sum of Rs. 698. The second respondent, the Sales Officer, District Co-operative Bank, Quilon issued a notice of demand Ext. P-1 to the first petitioner and a notice of demand Ext. P-2 to the second petitioner calling upon them to pay the respective amounts due from each of them. This was followed by attachment of certain moveables belonging to the first petitioner, and certain immovable properties belonging to the petitioners. Exts. P-3 and P-4. both dated 28-6-1969, are the attachment schedules. Both these attachments were made for recovery of the aggregate amounts due under the aforesaid two awards. The above action was taken by the second respondent under Section 76 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Ac...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 1971 (HC)

Ponkunnam Traders Vs. Additional Income-tax Officer, Kottayam, and Ano ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1972]83ITR508(Ker); [1972]83ITR519(Ker)

MATHEW J. - In this proceeding the petitioner seeks to quash exhibit P-1, an order of assessment passed by the Income-tax Officer, the 1st respondent, on October 22, 1964, as well as the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, the 2nd respondent, in revision, from the appellate order from exhibit P-1.The petitioner was a dealer in hill produce. We are concerned in this case with the assessment of the petitioner to income-tax for the assessment year 1964-65 in respect of his income from transactions in dry ginger and proper. The petitioner in the return that he made a net profit of 5% on the turnover of dry ginger and 1 1/2% on the turnover of pepper. The Income-tax Officer was not satisfied with the correctness of the account produced by the assessee in support of the return in this respect and so he rejected the account and made a best judgment assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', adding Rs. 10,000 to the income of ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 14 1968 (HC)

Ernakulam Co-operative Milk Supply Union Ltd. Vs. Government of India ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : (1968)IILLJ666Ker

V. Balakrishna Eradi, J.1. This petition has been preferred by a co-operative society registered under the Traancore-Cochin Co-operative Societies Act which is engaged in the business of supply of milk and milk products tot he public, the requisite milk being collected from the members of the society.2. In December 1964, respondent 2 who is the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Kerala, informed the society that the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952, and the scheme framed thereunder had become applicable to the society with effect from 30 April 1962, inasmuch as the society came within the scope of entry 22 in appendix I wherein the classes of establishments to which the Act has been made applicable Under Section 1(8)(b) of the Act have been enumerated. Respondent 2 accordingly called upon the society to remit the contribution and to submit the returns with effect from 1 May, 1962.3. Entry 22 in appendix I which was introduced by a notification of Central Government dated 7 March...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 1963 (HC)

Ephrem Ambooken, Poyya, Via Chalakudy Vs. Asst. Chief Officer, Reserve ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1966Ker6

ORDERP. Govindan Nair, J.1. The short question arising for decision in this Original Petition is whether the provisions of Section 35B(1)(b) of the Banking Companies Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), is violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. Section 35B(1) of the Act is in these terms:'35B. (1) In the case of a banking company-- (a) no amendment of any provision relating to the appointment or re-appointment or remuneration of a managing director or any other director, whole-time or otherwise or of a manager or a chief executive officer by whatever name called, whether that provision be contained in the company's memorandum or articles of association, or in an agreement entered into by it, or in any resolution passed by the company in general meeting or by its Board of Directors shall have effect unless approved by the Reserve Bank:(b) no appointment or re-appointment of a managing or whole time director, manager or chief executive officer by whatever name call...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 1963 (HC)

The Valapad Co-operative Stores Ltd. Vs. K.H. Srinevasa Iyer Brothers, ...

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!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //