Kerala Court December 1957 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
State Vs. Sait Nagjee Purushotham and Co., Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-23-1957
Reported in: [1958]9STC574(Ker)
Vaidialingam, J. 1. These three appeals are filed by the State against the decrees passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Kozhi-kode against the State in O. S. Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of 1951 on his file.2. The point that arises for decision in all the appeals is common and that is the liability of the plaintiffs for payment of sales tax to the State.3. The plaintiffs and defendant are common in all the three suits. The plaintiffs are Messrs Sait Nagjee Purushotham and Company, Limited, and defendant in all the suits was the then State of Madras represented by the Collector of Malabar, Kozhikode. As the point involved is a very short one, it is unnecessary to go into the details of each of the cases. It is enough to state that the three suits relate to the assessment to sales tax of the plaintiffs for the periods ending 31st March, 1945, 31st March, 1946, and 31st March, 1947. The plaintiff disputed his liability to pay sales tax and has availed himself of all the remedies open to him unde...
Sankara Pillai and ors. Vs. Mathunni Ittiera and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-23-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Ker245
Raman Nayar, J.1. The appellants are the plaintiffs whose suit for the redemption of a usufructuary mortgage has been dismissed by the court below on the preliminary finding that it is premature.2. Ext. B is a copy of the mortgage in question. It was executed in favour of the 1st defendant on 27-2-1121 M. E, (13-10-1945) by the karnavan and senior anandaravan of a Mana governed by the Travancore Malayala Brahmins' Act (Act III of 1106). Before its registration on 4-5-1121 (18-12-1945) the entire consideration of Rs. 7500/- was paid by the discharge of debts binding on the Mana and secured on its properties. Of the 22 items of properties comprised in the mortgage, possession of five items, of which the Mana was in actual possession, was made over to the 1st defendant. For the rest, the 1st defendant was required to evict the tenants in actual possession, filing suits, if necessary, within six months of the registration of the document & adding the expenses thereof to the mortgage money;...
Raman Nambudiri Vs. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-23-1957
Reported in: [1958]9STC261(Ker)
K. Sankaran, J. 1. This criminal revision case has been filed on behalf of the accused in C. C. No. 193/1956 on the file of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate's Court at Malappuram. One Devaky Amma was the owner of a provision shop at Manjeri. The accused was in charge of the affairs of this shop as the agent of the owner of the shop. At 4 P. M. on 16th April, 1956, P. W. 1 who was at that time Deputy Commercial Tax Officer at Manjeri, entered this shop for inspection of the accounts to find out whether there has been any suppression of sales and purchases in that shop with a view to evade payment of sales tax. The accused was then sitting at the counter and was looking after the business of the shop. On seeing P. W. 1 entering the shop, the accused suddenly removed a pocket notebook that was kept on the table in the shop and placed it in his own pocket. P. W. 1 made repeated demands for surrender of that book for his inspection on the basis that it was one of the books kept in the shop in ...
Mary Threys Fernando Vs. C.i. Philip
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Ker175
Raman Nayar, J.1. The appellant is a plaintiff who has been given the declaration, she sought, namely, that a decree obtained against her by the 1st defendant while she was a minor, and the execution, sale in pursuance thereof, were null and void as against her, as also the consequential relief of possession of the property in suit together with future mesne profits, but is nevertheless aggrieved with the direction of the court below that the 1st defendant be allowed to continue the prior suit from the date of issue of summons, and with its denial to her of past mesne profits.2. The property in suit, a house, belonged originally to the plaintiffs mother. (That is the plaintiff a case and we may assume it to be so for the present purpose although it would appear that in his written statement the 1st defendant contended that the property really belonged to the plaintiff's father, the 2nd defendant.The plaintiff's parents mortgaged it to a bank and the 1st defendant who got an assignment ...
V.M. Patel Vs. Inspector of Factories, Alwaye
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Ker237; 1958CriLJ1026; (1958)IILLJ405Ker
ORDERSankaran, J. 1. This revision petition is directed against the conviction of the petitioner for offences under Clauses (a) and (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section 6 and also under Section 7 road with Section 92 of the Factories Act (Act LXIII of 1948). (The petitioner is the managing partner of a firm known by the name 'Gujarat Travancoro Agency' doing business at Mattancherry. This firm is dealing in pepper, and in that connection the process of drying, garbling and packing of pepper is being carried on in the premises of the firm at Mattancherry.According to the prosecution the work thus carried on by this firm amounts to a manufacturing process as contemplated by the Factories Act and more than 20 persons are being regularly engaged by the petitioner to have this work' done. On this basis it is contended that the petitioner has been running a factory as defined in the Factories Act and the petitioner's position is that of the, occupier of the factory.2. On 10-11-1953 Pw 1 who is ...
Kesavan Padmanabhan and ors. Vs. Sanku Narayanan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Ker368
K.T. Koshi, C.J.1. This Second Appeal is by the plaintiff. The suit out of which it arises was brought by him in his right as Court auction-purchaser of Survey Plot 233/4 (Kormancherri Purayidom) in Vayalar West Pakuthy, to compel defendant 1, a Court auction-purchaser of certain buildings standing on it, to remove them. Kormancherri Purayidom as well as the buildings thereon belonged originally to a marumakkaihayam Ezhava family of which defendants 2 to 5 were members.Under a partition arrangement evidenced by Ext. E (27-6-1091) the said purayidom which formed the homestead of the family and the buildings with winch we are concerned here went to the share of the branch of defendants 2 to 5. oN the date of the partition, the plaintiff's father was the karnavan of the family. At the partition he took his share separately and bequeathed the same to his wife and children.Under Ext. E, the remaining members of the family, that is, members other than the plaintiff's father and defendants 2 ...
The Travancore Sugars and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. the State of Kerala and a ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Ker217; (1958)IILLJ208Ker
ORDERC.A. Vaidialingam, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by Messrs. Travancore Sugars and Chemicals Ltd., Management of the Pamba River Factory, Thiruvella praying that this court be pleased (a) to call for the records of the case and to quash the order of reference No. L. Dis. 4270 of 1956 dated 30-10-1956 (produced along with the affidavit and marked 'A' for identification), by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction, or in the alternative to issue a writ directing the 2nd respondent to forbear from proceeding with the enquiry in pursuance of the Notification Ex. A; and (b) to pass such other and further writs, orders or directions as are deemed just and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. The 1st respondent is the State of Kerala represented by the Labour Secretary to Government, Trivandrum and 2nd Respondent is the-Industrial Tribunal, Alleppey. 3. Ex. A referred to above is the order dated 3...
State of Travancore-cochIn Vs. Narayani Amma Ponnamma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Ker272
G. Kumara Pillai, J. 1. This is an appeal by the State against the enhancement of an award in a Land Acquisition Case, and the only point urged by the learned Government Pleader is that the application to the Collector, who was the Land Acquisition Officer, to make the Reference to the District Court was barred by limitation under Proviso (h) to Section 18 (2) of the Travancore Land Acquisition Act and that the District Court should not have, therefore, entertained the Reference.This contention was not raised by the State in the District Court and was advanced for the first time in the memorandum of appeal filed here. But, according to the learned Government Pleader, the contention raises only a pure question of law and so it is open to him to raise it in this Court even though it was not taken in the lower Court.2. The acquisition relates to 33.471 cents of land in S. No. 12/3 of Nellanad Pakuthy, Nedumangad Taluk. The notice under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued by t...
Kuruvilla Cheriyan Vs. Kuruvilla Chandy
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-13-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Ker229
Koshi, C.J.1. This appeal arises from an order directing the re-delivery of properties taken possession of by the decree-holder pursuant to a decree for ejectment. The decree was one passed by the Travancore-Cochin High Court on 16-2-1954 in A. S. no. 158 of .1953 confirming the decision of the District Court of Kottayam in O. S. No. 114 of 1122. Soon after the appellate decree the decree-holder obtained delivery through court on 9-3-1954. The judgment-debtor applied for re-delivery on 3-4-1954, but that application was dismissed on 15-10-1954. In appeal the order was reversed and the proceedings were remitted to the lower court for fresh disposal in the light of the remand order. The revised order was passed by the Subordinate Judge, Meenachil to whose court the case was transferred from the file of the Kottayam, District Court. The date of the revised order is 8-7-1957.2. The application for re-delivery was based on the provisions of Act VIII of 1950 which was but a temporary enactme...
Karanakkodan Gowda Swaraswatha Brahman Samajam Vs. Manikka Pai
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-12-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Ker384
Raman Nayar, J.1. This second appeal arises out of proceedings in execution of the decree in O. S. 22 of 1115 on the file of the Munsiffs Court, Trichur.2. The decree in question, a decree for money against two defendants, was passed on 11-4-1115 (27-11-1939). In E. P. 1148 of 1950, the decree-holder applied for execution. Thereupon the two defendants filed M. P. 875 of 1951 praying that they may be allowed to pay the decree amount in instalment of Rs. 5 each per month. On the decree-holder agreeing to this, the executing court made the following order: 'As agreed to by the decree-holder, both judgment-debtors are allowed to pay each at the rate of Rs. 5 per mensem from 2-7-1951 and in default in a lump.' This was on 2-6-1931, and on the same day E. P. 1148 of 1950 was dismissed and thereafter the two defendants paid five instalments each until 2-11-1951. Then they defaulted, and on 28-5-1954 the decree-holder came forward with his present execution petition E. P. 422 of 1954 (within t...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »