Kerala Court November 1959 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 of Kerala Vs. Thomma Kochuthoma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-13-1959
Reported in: 1959CriLJ1322; AIR 1959 Ker 350
Joseph, J. 1. This is an appeal by the State against the order of acquittal by the 1st Class Magistrate, Chalakudy in a case under the Travancore-Cochin Forest Act. The case was posted for trial on 8-3-1958 on which date the Range Officer who charged the case was absent. The learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 247 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.It is contended on behalf of the State that the Court was not justified in acquitting the accused as the absence of the Range Officer on the date of hearing was due to the fact that he was not aware of the date of posting. It is stated on behalf of the appellant that though the charge report was filed on 24-2-1958 the case was not taken on file that day and that the Range Officer was not aware whether it was subsequently taken on file and posted for evidence. It is therefore contended that the complainant could not be deemed to have been absent on that day,2. Shri Moothedan learned counsel for the respondents raised a preli...
Richard Saldana and ors. Vs. State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-13-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker200; 1960CriLJ828
ORDERS. Velu Pillai, J. 1. This is a petition by accused 1 and his father, accused 3, to revise a judgment of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Trivandrum, by which, on appeal, he affirmed the convictions of the accused by the Stationary Second Class Magistrate, Neyyattinkara, under Section 353, I.P.C. and under Section 353 read with S. 109, I. P. C. respectively. In appeal, the accused were sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- each and in default, to undergo simple Imprisonment for two months. 2. The broad facts are, that when Pw. 1 a Co-operative Extension Officer was proceeding to Trivandrum in a State Transport Bus, after 5 P. M., after attending a meeting of a Co-operatice Society, the first accused assaulted him at the instigation of the third accused, at the Pulluvila bus stop. The courts below have entered the conviction under Section 353, I, P. C. on the finding, that Pw. 1, while travelling in the bus, was executing his duty as a public servant. His headquarters and his residenc...
Muhammed Ismail Vs. Sarammal
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-13-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker262
ORDERAnna Chandy, J.1. The revision petitioner is the respondent in M. C. 38 of 1957 of the Adoor First Class Magistrate's Court against whom, an award for maintenance was passed under Section 488, Criminal Procedure Code. The order is dated 30-1.0-1958. Subsequently the respondent filed several petitions alleging that a valid divorce was effected between the petitioner and respondent on 3-12-1958 and as such the petitioner is not thereafter entitled to claim maintenance. He had also filed a list of witnesses and produced some records in support of his plea. The application was objected to by the petitioner who denied the alleged divorce and also questioned the validity of it.The petitions were dismissed by the Magistrate by the order challenged in revision. The learned Magistrate while holding that 'a valid divorce under the Moliammadan Law is a change in the circumstances entitling the Magistrate to refuse to enforce a maintenance order', dismissed the application on the ground that ...
Bernado Steenholf Ultrich Vs. Collector of Customs, Cochin
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-10-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker170
ORDERRaman Nayar, J.1. The petitioner a Bolivian National said to be of German Dutch origin and resident in Vienna, was a passenger from Colombo to Genoa on the Italian passenger vessel M. V. Australia which called at Cochin fa regular port of call on its homeward voyages for the purpose of taking on board passengers bound for Europe) on 5-12-1958. With him was his wife and, as part of his baggage, a Volks-wagon motor car also booked from Colombo to Genoa. Three or four hours after the vessel was moored in the inland waters of the Cocbin Port, the Chief Customs Inspector who, on information that the petitioner was engaged in smuggling gold into India and taking out Indian currency had bad a watch kept over the petitioner's movements but found that the petitioner was making no attempt to land or get into touch with anyone on shore, boarded the vessel with a few of his subordinate officers as he was entitled to under Section 171 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878.He asked the petitioner whethe...
Assya Umma Vs. Kolakkani Kunhoyi
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-09-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker198
Vaidialingam, J.1. In this appeal on behalf of the defendants, the learned Advocate General appearing for the appellant, contests the decision of both the subordinate courts that Ext. B1 in this case represents only a mortgage by conditional sale and not a sale with option to re-purchase,2. The suit was for redemption of a transaction which styles itself as a kara theeradharam. Ext. B-1 dated 10-5-1936 for a sum of Rs. 400. The recitals in the document will be gone into a little more in detail in due course. The suit for redemption, on the ground, that this is only a mortgage by conditional sale was contested by the defendants on the ground that it was not a mortgage by conditional sale but it can only amount to a sale with an option to repurchase and as the period had already elapsed there was no further right in the plaintiff over the plaint properties.3. Both the subordinate courts on a consideration of all tile decisions bearing on this matter and especially the decision of their L...
Raman Pillai Vs. Chacko and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-06-1959
Reported in: (1960)ILLJ297Ker
T.K. Joseph, J.1. This appeal arises from an order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Trivandrum, awarding compensation to the respondents who are the legal representatives of one Chacko Baby who died on 11 November 1953. According to the respondents he was a workman engaged by the appellant for breaking stones and transporting the same to Chavara where the appellant, a Government contractor, was repairing the Alleppey-Quilon Road. It is stated that Chaoko Baby and other workmen loaded the metal in the lorry and were travelling on it, for the purpose of unloading the metal at the workspot when he fell from the lorry. The lorry ran over him, causing his death. The appellant filed a statement before the Commissioner denying the allegation that Chacko Baby was a workman under him. It was stated that he was travelling in the lorry on that day to go to a cinema theatre and that when the lorry reached the theatre, he jumped from the lorry and that the accident was caused in that...
Varkey Thomas and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-06-1959
Reported in: [1960]11STC60(Ker)
M.S. Menon, J.1. These five petitions raise a common question relating to the levy of the surcharge under Section 3(1) of the Kerala Surcharge on Taxes Act, 1957. That sub-section (omitting the proviso thereto) reads as follows :The tax payable under the Travancore-Cochin General Sales Tax Act, 1125, or the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939, shall, in the case of a dealer whose turnover exceeds thirty thousand rupees in a year, be increased by a surcharge at the rate of two and a half per centum of the tax payable for that year and the provisions of the Travancore Cochin General Sales Tax Act, 1125, or the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939, shall, as the case may be, apply to the levy and collection of the said surcharge.2. The Act came into force on 1st September, 1957. The question for consideration is whether the surcharge can be levied on the sales tax in respect of transactions which occurred in 1956-57 (1st April, 1956, to 31st March, 1957), i.e., prior to the date on which the...
In Re: Free India Bank Ltd. (In Liquidation)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-04-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker168; [1962]32CompCas113(Ker)
ORDERRaman Nayar, J.1. The question raised is this: When a company that is being wound up is the foreman of a chitty governed by the provisions of the Travancore Chiltics Act. 1120, are the 'prized subscribers' from whom money is due to the chitty entitled to have moneys clue to them from the company under other dealings set off against their chitty debts. In other words, whether what I might call an ordinary debt due by the foreman company can be set off against a chitty debt due to it. It has been argued on behalf of the 'non-prized subscribers' whom I might call chitty creditors of the company, that, in the face of the charge given to them by Section 42 of the Chitties Act, they are in the position of secured creditors who, by reason of Section 529(1)(c) of the Companies Act read with Section 28(6) of the Kerala Inslovency Act, have the right to realise the money due to them from their security and that there can be no set off to the detriment of that right. On the other hand it has...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›