Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: kerala Year: 1998 Page 1 of about 11 results (0.010 seconds)

Oct 16 1998 (HC)

Preman Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Oct-16-1998

Reported in : AIR1999Ker93

..... charitable use which are not subject to any outside influence.11. the next contention is that there is no rationale behind limiting the survival of testatorto a period of 12 months in order to give effect tohis wishes. there is no rationale in the classification between a testator who survives beyond 12months and a testator who does not survive beyond the same .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 06 1998 (HC)

Dr. A.V. Gopalakrishnan and ors. Vs. Byju N. and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Aug-06-1998

Reported in : AIR1999Ker10

..... judge in quashing interchangeability of tutors with the inservice candidates and directing that unfilled seats should go to general candidates and also agree with the finding that there is no rationale in giving first preference to inservice candidates in selection of subject and colleges and after finishing their choice leftovers only be given to the general merit quota as it is ..... fact that the government has yet to frame a policy so that all different categories including general merit candidates and inservice candidates are able to get equal opportunity on a rationale and fair basis in the matter of selection of subjects and colleges, at its distance of time to avoid hardship to students, we are not disturbing the present status quo .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1998 (HC)

The Commissioner and Secretary to Govt. Higher Education Dept. Vs. Jay ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Mar-03-1998

Reported in : AIR1998Ker167

..... . the council was set up to determine and coordinate the standards of technical education throughout the country to integrate its development and to maintain certain standard in such education. the rationale behind setting up the council was to bring about uniformity in technical education all over the country. the supreme court has nowhere observed in adhiyaman educational & research institute's case .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 1998 (HC)

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Alavi

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Apr-06-1998

Reported in : 1998ACJ1048; (1998)IILLJ896Ker; 1998(1)KLT951

..... duty of excise either under entry 51 or entry 8 of list ii of the seventh schedule. while doing so, it was not preceded by any discussion. no reason or rationale could be found in the order. this gave rise to an important question, if the conclusion is law declared under article 141 of the constitution, or it is per incuriam .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 1998 (HC)

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Chandran P. and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Apr-06-1998

Reported in : (2000)ILLJ771Ker

..... or excise either under entry 51 or entry 8 of list ii of the seventh (sic) schedule. while doing so, it was not preceded by any discussion. no reason or rationale could be found in the order. this gave rise to an important question, if the conclusion is law declared under article 141 of the constitution, or it isper incuriam and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 15 1998 (HC)

Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. N.C.J. John

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-15-1998

Reported in : (1998)149CTR(Ker)299; [1998]233ITR475(Ker)

om prakash, c.j.1. pursuant to the direction under section 256(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 (briefly, 'the act'), the income-tax appellate tribunal, at the instance of the revenue, referred the following questions relating to the consecutive assessment years 1982-83 to 1984-85 for the opinion of this court :'question in r.a. no. 85(coch.) of 1991--assessment year 1982-83 : whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and considering the search conducted in the premises of the assessee under section 132 of the income-tax act, is the appellate tribunal right in law in holding that the revised return filed by the assessee subsequent to the search is to be considered as a return under the amnesty scheme ?' questions in r.a. nos. 86(coch.) of 1981 and 87(coch.) of 1981-assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 : (1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the appellate tribunal right in law in holding that the revised return filed by the assessee subsequent to the search should be considered as a return under the amnesty scheme ? (2) whether the appellate tribunal was right in holding so, when the answer to question no. 12 of the central board of direct taxes circular no. 451 (see [1986] 158 itr 135), dated february 17, 1986, rulesout any immunity for assessee whose premises have been searched bythe tax authorities ?' the facts as found by the appellate tribunal, are that the assessment for the assessment year 1982-83 had been completed without .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1998 (HC)

K. Kuttan Nair Vs. P. Mammi and anr.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-03-1998

Reported in : [1999]96CompCas453(Ker); 1999CriLJ260

k.a. mohammed shafi, j. 1. this application is filed by the revision petitioner to condone the delay of 123 days in preferring the crl. r. p. under section 5 of the limitation act.2. the crl. r. p. is filed against the order dated june 5, 1997, passed by the judicial first class magistrate's court, tirur, in s. t. no. 212 of 1996 dismissing the complaint filed by the petitioner against the respondent alleging offence punishable under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act finding that the complaint is not maintainable since there was no proper notice as contemplated under proviso (b) to section 138 of the negotiable instruments act relying upon the decision of the calcutta high court in gopa devi ozha v. sujit paul (1996] 2 klt 886. 3. the petitioner has contended that after the order was passed, his counsel advised that there is little scope to challenge the order of dismissal of the complaint in view of the judgment of the calcutta high court in gopa devi ozha v. svjit paul [1996] 2 klt 886. subsequently when he contacted his counsel in november, 1997, he was informed by counsel that the legal position has been changed in view of the subsequent decision of this court reported in kunjan panicker v. christudus [1997] 2 klt 539. therefore, he immediately applied for a certified copy of the order on november 13, 1997, obtained the copy on december 4, 1997, and he made arrangements to file the revision petition before this court on december 20, 1997. he has further .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 1998 (HC)

Mrs. Mary John Vs. Vallathol Nagar Grama Panchayat and anr.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-16-1998

Reported in : AIR1999Ker161

p. shanmugam, j.1. both these original petitions are filed under article 226 of the constitution of india by the same petitioner. the prayers in these petitions are to quash the orders disqualifying the petitioner from the membership of the panchayat and for a declaration to declare that section 35(k) of the kerala panchayath raj act, 1994, hereinafter referred to as 'the act', to the extent of limiting the period of absence for disqualification to 'if within the said period not less than three meetings have been held' is arbitrary and unconstitutional.2. petitioner is a resident of vallathol nagar grama panchayath. she is a well-known social worker, professional artist and an organiser. she was elected as a member of the panchayath from ward no. 111 which was reserved for women, during october, 1995 as an independent candidate. the panchayath has 10 seats out of which six were won by the l.d.f. and the other three seats were won by candidates from bjp, muslim league and congress on each.3. during august and september, 1997 in connection with the 50th anniversary of indian independence celebrations abroad petitioner was invited to spain and italy. in the last panchayath committee meeting held on 20-8-1997 she had informed of her leaving abroad to all the members including the panchayath secretary. she was told by the secretary that there is no need for any written application for seeking permission if the tour is less than three months. therefore, the petitioner took back the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 11 1998 (HC)

Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. N.C.J. Rajan

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-11-1998

Reported in : [1999]240ITR715(Ker)

om prakash c. j.1. these are two groups of i. t. rs. relating to the consecutive assessment years 1978-79 to 1980-81 and 1981-82 to 1984-85 pertaining to one and the same assessee.2. the questions referred for the opinion of this court by the income-tax appellate tribunal are as follows :i. t. r. nos. 147 to 150 of 1996 : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and considering the fact that a search was conducted in the premises of the asses-see under section 132 of the income-tax act, is the tribunal right in law in holding that the revised return filed by the assessee subsequent to the search is to be considered as a return under the amnesty scheme ?' i. t. r. nos. 62 to 64 of 1997 : '1. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the appellate tribunal right in law in holding that the revised return filed by the assessee subsequent to the search should be considered as a return under the amnesty scheme ? 2. whether, the appellate tribunal was right in holding so, when the answer to question no. 12 of the cbdt circular no. 451 (see [1986] 158 itr 135), dated february 17, 1986, rules out any immunity for the assessee whose premises have been searched by the tax authorities ?' 3. the submission of learned senior standing counsel before us is that a search was conducted on the premises of the assessee on february 23, 1984, and then certain fixed deposits and bank pass books were seized. the assessee filed a return of wealth on march 31, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 11 1998 (HC)

Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. N.C.i Rajan

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Nov-11-1998

Reported in : (1999)153CTR(Ker)370

omprakash, qj:these are two groups of it reference relating to the consecutive asst. yrs. 1978-79 to 1980-81 and 1981-82 to 1984-85 pertaining to the one and the same assessee.2. the questions referred for the opinion of this court by the tribunal are as follows:it ref. nos. 147 to 150 of 1996'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and considering the fact that a search was conducted in the premises of the assessee under s. 132 of the it act, is the tribunal right in law in holding that the revised return filed by the assessee subsequent to the search is to be considered as a return under the amnesty scheme?'it ref. nos. 62 to 64 of 19971. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case was the tribunal right in law in holding that the revised return filed by the assessee subsequent to the search should be considered as a return under the amnesty scheme?2. whether, the tribunal was right in holding so, when the answer to question no. 12 of cbdt circular no. 451 dt. 17th feb., 1986, rules out any immunity for assessee whose premises have been searched by the tax authorities?'3. the submission of the learned senior standing counsel before us is that search was conducted on the premises of the assessee on 23rd feb., 1984 and then certain fixed deposits and bank pass-books were seized. the assessee filed return of wealth on 31st march, 1986, declaring additional net wealth for the purpose of amnesty scheme. it is submitted by the senior standing .....

Tag this Judgment!


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