Kerala Court August 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.
Bhavani Vs. Bhanu
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-12-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker133
ORDERP.T. Raman Nayar, J.1. I have no doubt that the court below erred in dismissing the revision petitioner's suit for arrears of salary, and to me, it seems clear that she must be given the decree she sought.2. Admittedly the defendant, who is the manager of a private school governed by what is known as the P. S. S. (Private Secondary Schools) Scheme, appointed the plaintiff as the headmistress of his school on a salary of Rs. 45/- per mensem inclusive of allowances. She worked as the headmis-tress for three months, the months of June, July and August 1956, at the end of which she resigned because her appointment was not approved by the Education Department of the Government as required by the Scheme--it is the common case that the appointment was in terms of the Scheme.Admittedly again, the defendant has paid the plaintiff not a pie for her salary, and in dismissing the suit the court below has accepted his contention, that the appointment made by him was conditional on departmental...
Urmese Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-12-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker197
T.K. Joseph, J. 1. The appellant stands convicted under section 304 part 2 of the I.P.C. The case for the prosecution was that, following a quarrel between his children and the son of the deceased, the latter abused the accused's wife and on her reporting the same to the accused, he dealt one blow with his hand to the deceased, while he was returning from the market, and that the latter died a few hours later. Though the charge against the accused was one under section 302, the learned Judge found that the offence proved was only culpable homicide not amounting to murder. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years. 2. The fact that deceased Kuttan died as a result of injuries sustained was not disputed. This is satisfactorily proved by the post-mortem certificate Ext. P6, the inquest report, Ext. P. 8, and the evidence of Pw. 1, Pw. 6, Pw. 20 and Pw. 21. According to medical evidence, the cause of death was fracture of the vertebrae. The 1st and 2nd curvical vertebrae were...
Abdulla and ors. Vs. Kunhammad Alias Ahmad
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-11-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker123
Velu Pillai, J. 1. This is an appeal by defendants 34 to 42, 44, 45 and 52 and is directed against a preliminary decree passed by the Subordinate Judge at Tellicherry, for partition of properties which were found to belong to a Moplah Marumakkathayam tarwad called Adeelakath tarwad or which may be referred to as the tarwad, consisting of the plaintiff and of defendants 1 to 45 and 49. The plaintiff sued for partition and recovery of 1/47th share of 43 items of properties described in B schedule of the plaint. The chief defence put up by the appellants was, that items 2 to 43 of B schedule are not partible, as they belong to a tavazhi in the tarwad, called Unnintayide tavazhi, of the appellants, or shortly the tavazhi, and not to the tarwad.The court below has now found, that of these items, all, except items 2, 4 and 6, are partible; this was partly on the basis of the decision in aprevious litigation, evidenced by judgment Ext. A-3 rendered on appeal, by the Subordinate Judge, and con...
Superintendent Nellikai Estate Vs. their Workmen
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-10-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker103
Vaidialingam, J.1. This is an application by the Superintendent of the Nellikkai Estate, Vandiperiyar, under Article 226 of the Constitution, for quashing the award in Industrial Dispute No. 88/1957 of the Industrial Tribunal, Ernakulam and published in the Kerala Gazette dated 28-4-1959. The first respondent is the workman of the Nellikkai Estate, Vandiperiyar, represented by this President, Peer-made Taluk Estate Labour Union, Vandiperiyar, the second respondent is the Industrial Tribunal, Ernakulam and the third respondent herein is the State of Kerala. The Government notification, including the award is marked as Ex-Pi in these proceedings.2. The issue that was referred for adjudication of the Tribunal by the State Government was:'Whether the dismissal of the 5 workers named below from the Nellikkai Estate is justifiable? If not justifiable, to what reliefs are the dismissed workers entitled? Names of workers: (1) Rajendran (2) Thangavelu; (3) Rajiah (4) Bhaskaranathan and (5) Shan...
State Vs. theyyan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-10-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker147; 1960CriLJ592
Sankaean, C.J.1. This is a reference made by the District Magistrate of Palghat pointing out the illegality committed by the Second Class Magistrate at the station, in awarding the sentence to the accused in C. C. No, 1462/1958, who was tried and convicted for the offence under Section 325 I. P. C. After finding the accused guilty at the offence under that section, the learned Magistrate awarded only a nominal sentence of fine of Rs. 30/- with the direction that in default of payment of fine, the accused should undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 30 days. The learned District Magistrate points out that the failure of the Second Class Magistrate to award a substantive sentence of imprisonment is a flagrant violation of the mandatory provision contained in Section 325 of the Penal Code and that the illegality committed by the Magistrate requires rectification.2. In view of the clear and convincing evidence adduced by the prosecution, it cannot he said that the learned Magistrat...
Tulsidas Mulji and anr. Vs. Ebrahimjee and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-07-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker75
M.S. Menon, J. 1. This is an appeal from the decision of the Subordinate Judge of South Malabar at Kozhikode in O. S. No, 41 of 1948. The suit was for damages for the breach of a contract of affreightment and the return of the advance freight paid by the plaintiffs.2. The total claim was for a sum of Rs. 10,736-10-6. The lower Court said :'The suit is decreed with costs against defendants 1 to 3 jointly and severally for the sum of Rs. 10,736-10-6 with interest thereon at 6 per cent. from the date of plaint and full costs of suit withinterest thereon at 6 per cent, from this date till realisation.'3. The 2nd defendant was the tindal of the country craft Itehrnania, the vessel concerned in this case. He had not chosen to appeal and the decree as far as he is concerned does not arise for consideration.4. In the plaint as originally filed there were only two defendants :'Tulsidas Mulji ,1011 of Mulji Vishram trading under the name and style of Vishram Khimjee'and Hasan Ayooh, the tindal m...
Chunilal Bhagwandas Gandhi Vs. Ahamed Rowther
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-07-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker156
Velu Pillaj, J. 1. The suit out of which this appeal arises, was for the recovery of damages for breach of contract, to supply 1,000 bags of cotton seeds, and was instituted ostensibly on behalf of a partnership, described in the cause title in the plaint, as 'M.A. Ahamed Rowther and Brother, by partner M.A. Noor Row ther'. The defendant was described as a firm, represented by two partners whose names were set out. The defendant contended inter alia, that the partnership being unregistered, the suit is not maintainable by reason of Section 69(2) of the Partnership Act, 1932. 2. The partnership aforesaid, originally consisted of M.A. Ahamed Rowther and his brother Noor Rowther. After the death of the former in the year 1937, his eldest son Mohamad Moideen Rowther, was admitted to the partnership in December 1940. The partnership was registered under certificate Ext. A 24 dated 8-12-1941. During the pendency of the suit, Noor Rowther died in the year 1953, and Abdul Rahiman Rowther, anot...
Gopinathan Nair Vs. State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-06-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker63; (1960)ILLJ311Ker
T.K. Joseph, J.1. The petitioner who was a Sub-Inspector of Police in State service prays for the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, direction or order quashing the order of the respondent, the State of Kerala, dismissing him from service and also for a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondent to treat the petitioner as still in service and to allow him his salary, other emoluments and benefits of service,2. The facts necessary for the decision of the original petition may be briefly stated. The petitioner was the Sub-Inspector of Police at Kayam-kulam in November 1956. Following an enquiry into certain acts of misconduct alleged against him and two other police officers, he was dismissed from service by order (Ex. P 1) dated 12-1-1959. The case against the petitioner was that on thenight of 20-11-1956 he took a woman to the Government Rest House at Vavelikara for immoral purposes and that he spent the night there in ...
Raman Balan and ors. Vs. State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-05-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker263; 1960CriLJ1091
ORDERRaman Nayar, J.1. These three petitions which are by the same persons have been heard together since they involve the same question. The petitioner is the 1st accused in three cases, C. C. 758, 759 and 760 of 1958 on the file of the Second Class Magistrate, Mukundapuram,, in each of which he and 10 others have been charged by the police with offences under Sections 447 and 143 I. P. C. The petitioner undivided father holds certain lands on verumpattom, and the first informant in each of the cases claims to have been cultivating a piece of land on pankuvarom under, the petitioner's father. The accusation against the petitioner and his fellow accused in each case was that on 28-4-1958 they entered on the lands that were being cultivated by the first informants and proceeded to plough them. The first informants claimed that they were in possession of the lands, and from that springs the charge of criminal' trespass and of unlawful assembly for the purpose of criminal trespass.2. The ...
In Re: Bank of Deccan Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-04-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Ker15; [1960]30CompCas284(Ker)
ORDER1. The petitioners are a banking company and its directors, and they seek relief, under Section 633 of the Companies Act, 1956, from apprehended prosecution for failure to comply with the provisions of Sections 159, 166, 210 and 220 of the Act, the failure being punishable under Sections 162(1) 168, 210(5), and 220(3) respectively.2. It would appear from the affidavit filed in support of the petition that, soon after petitioners 1 to 11 became directors of the 12th petitioner company in pursuance of a scheme of reconstruction sanctioned by this court, the books of some of the branches of the company were seized by the police in connection with some criminal cases and are now in court, the cases being still pending. That being so, it was not possible for the company to prepare its balance-sheet and profit and loss account and get them audited and his was the reason why the company could not comply with the provisions referred to. I am satisfied that the default was due to reasons b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »