Kerala Court January 1961 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.
Madhavan Nair Vs. Ankan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-11-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker55
M. Madhavan Nair, J.1. The 9th defendant is the appellant. The decree in the case was for recovery of the property with arrears of rent at 16 1/2 parahs (local) of paddy per annum till date of deposit of compensation for improvements found due to the defendant, and thereafter mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 180/- per annum. Compensation for defendants' improvements having been deposited on 7-2-1955, the plaintiff claimed mesne profits from that date. The 9th defendant objected to the claim on the ground that all proceedings in delivery of possession of a leasehold having been stayed by statute his possession was not wrongful and as such the plaintiff is not entitled to mesne profits from him.2. The effect of the statute prohibiting eviction of the tenants, whether in execution of the decree or otherwise, is statutorily to continue the tenancy even though the lease has been determined. This is so even if the determination of the lease by the decree of court was before the statute prohi...
Bernardo Steenholf Ultrich Vs. Collector of Customs, Cochin
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-11-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker147; 1960CriLJ600
Ansari, C.J.1. The appellant, who is a Bolivian national, had embarked for Genoa from Colombo on an Italian passenger ship, and also booked, as part of his baggage, a car in the same ship. On December 5, 1958, the ship called at Fort Cochin, and a Customs Officer, having earlier information, went on board. The appellant, his wife and their cabin were searched; but nothing incriminating was found there. The Customs Officer was not satisfied: and, as the ship was about to leave, disembarked the appellant and his car. On December 6, 1958, the car was again searched; and then a secret receptacle was discovered where large quantity of Indian and American currency been concealed. Thereafter, the Customs Collector, on January 15, 1959 made the following Order:'I confiscate the currency viz., Indian Rs. 3,22,000/- and U. S. A. Dollars 44,900/- under Section 167, Clauses 8, 34, 35 and 73 of the Sea Customs Act. I also confiscate the motor car (Volke-wagon) No. OFR. 770 under Section 168 of the ...
In Re: Saw Mills and Industries Ltd., Trichur
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-10-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker148; [1963]33CompCas817(Ker)
ORDERM. Madhavan Nair, J.1. This petition is for compulsory winding up of the Saw Mills and Industries, Ltd, Kokkalai, Trichur. The petition was originally filed by Shri Mannathazhath Raman Menon, a shareholder. The company was then being managed by the Udaya Agencies (Private) Ltd, Trichur. as its Managing Agents. Finding that the bankers suspended operation of their accounts with the company because of the presentation of this winding up petition, the Director-in-charge of the Managing Agents moved this Court for appointment of a Receiver for carrying on the business of the company, which had large commitments then requiring immediate execution. That petition was allowed on 20-5-1960 and an Advocate Receiver was put in charge of the affairs of the company pending disposal of this petition. The Receiver assumed charge on 1-6-1960 and is carrying on business to the satisfaction of all concerned. The company is seen to make appreciable profits under his management. Encouraged apparently...
State of Kerala Vs. Mary C. Nidhiri Chacko
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-09-1961
Reported in: (1961)IILLJ569Ker
P.T. Raman Nayar, J.1. The accused in this case was convicted by the District Magistrate, Ernakulam of an offence punishable under Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months. On appeal, she was acquitted by the Sessions Court on the ground that there was no proper complaint in accordance with Section 34(1) of the Act and that, since the absence bf such a complaint was a bar to cognizance, the entire proceedings against the accused were without jurisdiction and therefore void, The Public Prosecutor has presented this appeal against that acquittal under Section 417 of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. I might observe at the outset that, if the trial itself was without jurisdiction, there could be no acquittal properly speaking, and that the order of the Sessions Court really amounts only to a discharge of the accused from the case, the use of the word 'acquittal' by the learned Judge bei...
L.W. Russel Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, KeralA.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-09-1961
Reported in: [1962]44ITR816(Ker)
ANSARI C.J. - These references are under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act and raise common questions of law. The relevant facts for deciding the questions in both are that the English and Scottish Joint Co-operative Wholesale Society Ltd. had, by contract of employment, provided that the society would make certain contributions in order to provide pensionary, or deferred annuity benefits to the societys employees, and the terms of such benefits were incorporated in a trust deed of July 27, 1934. Certain rules were also framed for the due and proper administration of the trust, whose copy has been made annexure 'B' to the cases. Under the aforesaid arrangement the society had to pay every month 1/3 of the premium payable by each employee, who paid the remaining 2/3 for effecting a policy of insurance, and these together constituted 15% of the employees salary. The annuity thus got became due on the employees retirement, or on completion of the age of 55, and would not under cl...
Krishna Bhatta Vs. Madhava Bhatta
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-06-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker24
ORDERM. Madhavan Nair, J.1. The plaintiff who admits himself to be the owner in possession of 1/3 of the suit properties has sought leave to institute the suit in forma pauperis. On account of the explanation added to Rule 1 of Order XXXIII C. P. C. the Court below refused to take into consideration his capacity to pay the Court-fee by virtue of his possession of the subject-matter of the suit, and finding that, apart from the above said properties, he is not possessed of means to pay the Court-fee on the plaint in the case granted him leave to institute the suit as a pauper. Even in the suit the plaintiff claims only a partition of 1/3 of the properties for himself. The suit has been instituted to set aside an ex parte decree for partition in which the identical properties were involved, the division in which did not seem to be agreeable to him. He sought relief under Order IX Rule 13 in the prior case but did not succeed.Needless to say when the person is admittedly in possession of ...
Kunhammad Makkaru Vs. Abdul Rahiman
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-06-1961
Reported in: 1961CriLJ234
ORDERP. Govinda Menon, J.1. This revision petition is filed against the order passed by the Executive First Class Magistrate, Muvattupuzha in M. C. 13 of 1980 under Section 145,Cri. P.C. In the order it is stated that the learned Magistrate was satisfied from the report of the police that a dispute exists concerning the conduct of the Chandanakudam Festival in the mosque in Mulavoor Village, The parties were called upon to put in written statements of their respective claims as to the fact of the management of the mosque.The learned Magistrate also passed orders attaching the mosque and its premises under proviso 3 to Sub-section (4) of Section 145, Cri. P.C. and appointing the Deputy Tahsildar of Muvattupuzha as the receiver of the mosque for the conduct of the festival. This order is challenged as one being passed without jurisdiction.2. A reading of the relevant papers in this case would show that the dispute really relates to the right to perform certain services in the mosque and ...
Sankarankutty Menon and ors. Vs. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tric ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-03-1961
Reported in: AIR1961Ker260; 1961CriLJ484
Raghavan, J. 1. These cases raise an important and interesting question of law regarding the necessity for obtaining sanction of the State Government to prosecute either under Section 132 or under Section 197(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The petitioner in Crl.. B. P. No. 238 of 1957 was charged under Sections 409 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code. He was the Head Accountant-cum-cashier in the Office of the Assistant Supply Officer, Ernakulam and he was entrusted with a sum of Rs. 1,525-8-6 on 16th February 1957, in his capacity as a public servant, for the purpose of disbursing that amount to one Padmanabha Prabhu, who supplied petrol to the Supply Department. He committed criminal breach of trust with respect to the said amount by dishonestly misappropriating the same or converting it to his own use and also committed falsification of accounts of the above Department by making false entries in the said accounts. On these allegations charges under Sections 409 and 477A of t...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala Vs. Tayaballi Mulla Jeevaji Kapasi ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-02-1961
Reported in: [1962]45ITR304(Ker)
REGHAVAN J. - The assessee in this reference is an individual doing business in Malabar produce, cloth, etc., in Kozhikode. For the assessment year 1945-46 he submitted a return showing a loss of Rs. 7,960; but the assessment was completed on a total income of Rs. 8,009 on 29th March, 1946. More than seven years after this the Income-tax Officer, getting information that large deposits were made in the name of the assessee in the Abdul Rehman Street branch of the Central Bank of India Ltd., in Bombay, requested the assessee to produce his bank accounts and explain the said deposits. The assessee did not comply with this request and, therefore, the Income-tax Officer on 18th March, 1954, issued a notice under section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, which was served on the assessees son on 22nd March, 1954. The Income-tax Officer, considering that said notice was not proper, issued another notice, which was affixed in the business premises of the assessee, as the assessee was said to be...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›