Unfair deal

Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against a person on the charges that he had issued paddy seeds at subsidised prices to several fictitious individuals. Although over seven years had passed from the date on which the reply to a show cause notice had been issued, the authorities had not passed a final order. Setting aside the memo of charges framed against the petitioner, the Madras High Court held that since the quantum of money involved was only about Rs 3,411, making the petitioner suffer for such a long period of time was wholly unjustified. As a result, the respondents were asked to settle all consequential benefits of the petitioner. (R. Rajasekar vs Secretary to Government Agricultural Department)

Words matter

Under the Building Tax Act of Kerala, buildings that are used “principally” as factories do not come under the purview of the act. But a garment manufacturing company was granted only partial exemption when it applied for it. The canteens and toilets on the premises were not exempted from the tax. When the company moved the high court, the authorities pleaded that since the exemption was meant for factories, only the manufacturing unit would qualify for exemption. Disagreeing, the Kerala High Court held that if a building was “principally” used as a factory, the words of the act indicated that the ancillary buildings attached to it were also equally eligible for exemption. (Kitex Garments vs State of Kerala)

Witness wanted

In a case concerning the eviction of tenants, the court for rent control as well as the appellate authority declined to grant an order of eviction. One of the grounds for the refusal of the order was that none of the three landlords had chosen to enter the witness box to testify regarding their need for additional accommodation. The case came up at the Kerala High Court, where the landlords pleaded that a power of attorney holder or agent could also depose in place of the landlords. Disagreeing, the Kerala High Court held that it was only the landlords who could best establish the reasonableness of their requirement. (J.C.R. Trading Ltd vs Varghese)