Kerala Court July 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.
Erumeli Estate Vs. Industrial Tribunal and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-14-1961
Reported in: (1962)IILLJ144Ker
C.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. In this writ proceeding, Mr. K.P. Abraham, learned Counsel for the writ petitioner, challenges the award of the Industrial Tribunal, Alleppey, in Industrial Dispute No. 48 of 1958. In particular, the learned Counsel attacks the jurisdiction of the tribunal to embark upon an enquiry, which is the subject-matter of issue 1; and there are also attacks made on the findings recorded under issues 6 and 7. The other questions decided under the various issues other than these issues do not arise for decision by this Court.2. Before I go into the merits of the attack relating to the findings recorded on issues 1, 6 and 7, I will deal with a general attack made by Mr. K.F. Abraham, learned counsel, based upon the provisions of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act. That is, according to the learned counsel, the award has not been published by the State Government within the period mentioned in Sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the Act. The award itself is dated 25 June...
Kochu Kunju Kunju Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-14-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ437
ORDERP. Govinda Menon, J.1. Accused 1 and 2 in C.C. 252 of 1939 on the file of the Munsiff-Migistrete, Paravur are the revision petitioners. There were in all six accused. They were convicted Under Sections 147, 224, 225 and 353 IPC In appeal accused 3 to 6 were acquitted. The 1st accused was convicted Under Section 224 IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 8 months and the 2nd accused was convicted Under Section 225 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 months.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has assailed the conviction: on the ground that the arrest of the .1st accused was not lawful and as such no offence is committed by either of the accused. Sections 224 and 223 of the Indian Penal Code deal with the resisdance or escape from lawful apprehension. It is essential for the conviction under these nektons that the prosecution should show that the apprehension or arrest made or attempted to be made was lawful in every way. The learned Public Prosecu...
N. Sami Iyer Vs. the State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-13-1961
Reported in: [1962]13STC21(Ker)
M.S. Menon, J.1. The petitioner is a dealer in tobacco. The controversy relates to 1957-58 and a turnover of Rs. 7,757-54.2. The turnover represents the purchases made by the petitioner between 1st April, 1957, and 30th September, 1957, and the sales effected by him between 1st October, 1957, and 13th December, 1957.During the period of the purchase 1st April, 1957, to 30th September, 1957, the petitioner was governed by the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939. Section 3(5) of that Act provided :The taxes under Sub-sections (1), (1-A) and 2 shall be assessed, levied and collected in such manner and in such instalments, if any, as may be prescribed :Provided that-(i) in respect of the same transaction of sale, the buyer or the seller, but not both, as determined by such rules as may be prescribed, shall be taxed ;(ii) where a dealer has been taxed in respect of the purchase of any goods in accordance with the rules referred to in Clause (1) of this proviso, he shall not be taxed again in...
Gosri Dairy Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-07-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker4; [1961]12STC683(Ker)
Madhavan Nair, J.1. These Tax Revision Cases are by the Gosri Dairy, Vyttila, a firm dealing in dairy products. The business necessitates keeping of a productive live-stock. As the productivity of milch cows is not without limitation of time, the firm has necessarily to sell away a part of the live-stock annually, to be replaced by fresh yielding stock. The question arose whether the proceeds of such sales are to be counted as part of the turnover of the firm liable to sales-tax.2. T. R. C. No. 82 of 1059 relates to the assessment for the year 1955-58, and No. 83 of 1959 for the year 1956-57. In these years, the proceeds of sales of dry cattle came to Rs. 11,270 and 15,890 respectively. The Sales Tax Officer included the above sums in the turnover of the petitioner's business for the relative years and assessed tax. The appeals by the firm before the Additional Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal proved unsuccessful. Hence these petitions for r...
Narayana Menoki Vs. Karthiayani
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-07-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker122
M. Madhavan Nair, J.1. These appeals arise from two suits O. S. Nos. 285 of 1953 and 38 of 1954, on the file of the, Addl. District Munsiff of Kozokode. As the two suits have been tried and disposed of jointly by one judgment, it is convenient to refer to the parties with reference to One of the suits; and hereinafter they will be referred to by their rank in the first-mentioned suit.2. The material facts of the cases are as fo-low:-O. S. No. 285 of 1953, is a suit for redemption of a mortgage. The property originally belonged to the tarwad of the 2nd defendant. On March 12, 1877, the then kaniavan of the tarwad mortgaged the same to Kunhitheyi Amma as per an 'Otti' deed (Ext. B-1). By assignment the mortgage became vested in the 1st defendant. The 2nd defendant having become the last survivor in his tarwad, sold the property to the plaintiff on March 2, 1953, as per Ext. B-2. The plaintiff issued a notice on March 6, 1953 to the 1st defendant demanding surrender of the property on red...
Thanu Ittiachen Vs. Mundi and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-06-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker58
Ansari, C.J. 1. The plaintiff is the appellant in both the appeals, and had, on 10-6-1121, demised the plaint A schedule items for a year to the first defendant. The lease, Ext. A, is a registered deed; and there under the lessee had stipulated an annual pattern of 190 paras of paddy, payable in Kanni and Makaram. The lessee had further offered the plaint B schedule property, which belongs to the lessee, as security for the due payment of the pattom. This part of Ext. A is important, and the following is the relevant extract from the translation furnished to us by the parties' learned advocates :'..... If the pattom is kept in arrears, the same will be paid with interest according to law, and the properties will be kept and taken care of by me without any damage to the survey stones and the boundaries. For the arrears of pattom and interest thereon and for the expenses of realisation of the same, if any incurred, the property held by me as per kanam document No. 1515/1101 and mortgaged...
Krishnan Chithan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-06-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ650
P. Govinda Menon, J.1. The appellant in this case has been convicted for the offence of tape under Section 376, I.P.C.2. The prosecution case is that on 12.7.1960 at about 4 p.m. the accused, committed rape on P.W. 1, a young girl aged 12 years from inside her house. The accused lives two houses away from the house of P.W. 1. P.W. 9 the father of the girl is employed at Cochin. On the morning of 12.7.1960 as usual P.W. 2 the mother went out for work leaving P.W. 1 and her two other children at home. The two children were sleeping and P.W. 1 was scrubbing the floor of the kitchen. At about 4 p.m. the accused came to the house, got inside the kitchen, took P.W. 1 to an adjacent room, laid her down, thrust his penis inside her vagina and committed rape. As a result of this the girl started bleeding.3. The accused then hurried to the place where the mother was working and fetched her home. The mother came to the house and the accused ran up to the nearby dispensary and fetched P.W. 6 the m...
M. Sudarsanan Iyengar and Sons Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-05-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker66; [1962]13STC17(Ker)
1. The petitioner has been assessed to sales tax under the General Sales Tax Act, 1125, by the Sales Tax Officer, I Circle, Quilon, in respect of the years 1956-57 and 1957-58. T. R. C. No. 47 of 1960 relates to 1956-57 and T. K. C. No. 48 of 1960 to 1957-58. 2. The controversy before us relates to certain sales between 1-4-1956 and 1-7-1957 which both the Department and the Appellate Tribunal refused to treat as inter-State sales and thus exempt from taxation, Paragraph 2 of the orders' of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in Sales Tax Appeal No. 75 of 1958 (T. R. C. No. 47 of 1960) and Sales Tax Appeal no. 398 of 1959 (T. ft. C. No. 48 of 1960) are identical in wording and reads as follows : 'The turnover disputed relates to sales effected to parties in Madras State. The mode of transaction is as follows. The parties place orders with, the appellant orally or through correspondence. The terms of sale are F. O. R. Quilon, Punalur, Edamon, (OR some other railway station in the State...
Travancore Coir Factory Staff Association Vs. Aspinwall and Co. (Trava ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-05-1961
Reported in: (1962)ILLJ488Ker
C.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. In both these writ petitions the award of the industrial tribunal, Alleppey, in Industrial Dispute No. 22 of 1958 is attacked by the respective petitioners. The dispute relates to the payment of bonus for the years 1956 and 1957. It is seen that the management and employees appear to have entered into a settlement whereby, both parties agreed to refer the issue as to whether Aspinwall & Co. (Travanoore), Ltd., Alleppey. was obliged to pay the same rate of bonus to the staff as was paid to the staff In Aspinwall & Co., Ltd., Cochin. This dispute, by agreement of parties, was accordingly referred to the industrial tribunal for adjudication and it is in consequence of the reference so made that the present award, that is under attack, has been passed by the tribunal.2. The only basis, so far as I could see for the claim made by the petitioners for payment of bonus for the years 1956 and 1957 appears to be that there is a custom and practice for the management to pa...
Vasu Vs. Chakki Mani
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-03-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ker84
ORDERP.T. Raman Nayar, J. 1. There are two objections taken by the petitioner, the defendant in a suit for the redemption of a possessory mortgage. The first is that the court-fee paid on the plaint is 'insufficient and the second that his plea of non-joinder of persons (other than the plaintiffs) interested in the equity of redemption was wrongly decided by the court below. Neither seems to me to come Within the scope of Section 115 of the Code. 2. Taking the second first, no doubt Order 34 Rule 1 requires that all persons having an interest in the right of redemption shall be joined as parties. The plaintiff's claimed that they were solely entitled to the right of redemption and the court below upheld the claim, rejecting the case of the defendant that the daughter and grandchildren of the first plaintiff also had an interest therein. This decision, even if it be wrong, is not one involving any question of jurisdiction. 3. For the first, I read the recent decision of the Supreme Cour...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›