Kerala Court January 1967 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.
Lakshmikutty Amma and ors. Vs. Narayana Pillai Velayudha Pillai and or ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-12-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Ker57
T.C. Raghavan, J.1. Defendants 2 to 4 and the legal representatives of the first defendant are the appellants and the plaintiffs the contesting respondents. The suit was for eviction on the plea of an oral lease, while the appellants pleaded another lease from a mortgagee of the landlord. The trial court decreed the suit with some reservation regarding the question of fixity of tenure under Act 8 of 1950; and on appeal and cross-appeal the lower appellate court confirmed the same. Before the lower appellate court the plaintiffs submitted that they would withdraw their case of oral lease and would accept the case put forward by the appellants. I may state that before this Act 4 of 1961 came into force, under which a lessee under a mortgagee was not entitled to fixity of tenure beyond the life of the mortgage.Consequently, the position was that if the case of oral lease set up by the plaintiffs was accepted, the appellants would have been entitled to fixity of tenure; but, if the case of...
C.C. Mathew Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-12-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Ker230
ORDERV.P. Gopalan Nambiar, J.1. This writ petition was posted along with the representations received from the 6th and 8th respondents that the provisions of the Indian Soliders' Litigation Act, 1925 may be taken into account and proceedings in this writ petition may be kept in abeyance. I considered these representations before arguments were heard on this writ petition.2. Section 6 of the Indian Soldiers' Litigation Act in so far as it is material, reads as follows: '6. Notice to be given in case of unrepresentative Indian Soldier -- (1) If a Collector has certified under section 5, or if the Court has reason to believe, that an Indian soldier, who is a party to any proceeding pending before it, is unable to appear therein, and if the soldier is not represented by any person duly authorised to appear, plead or act on his behalf, the court shall suspend the proceeding, and shall give notice thereof in the prescribed manner to the prescribed authority:Provided that the Court may refrai...
Anamalais Bus Transport Private Ltd., Chalakudi Vs. D. Ramakrishna Pil ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-12-1967
Reported in: AIR1967Ker225; (1967)ILLJ498Ker
ORDERV.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, J. 1. The question that was debated in this O. P. is whether the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act 1960 (Act 84 of 1960) is inconsistent with, or repugnant to, the Motor Transport Workers Act 1981 (Central Act 27/1981) (hereinafter referred toas the 'Kerala Act' and the 'Central Act'). The petitioner is the Manager of the Anamalais Bus Transport Ltd. The 1st respondent was a temporary employee under the petitioner from 7-2-1964 to 10-6-1964. On an appeal preferred by 1st respondent to the 2nd respondent, (theEpellate authority under Section 18 of the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishment Act 1960), the 2nd respondent found that there had been an illegal termination of the service of the 1st respondent and directed the 1st respondent's reinstatement with a payment of Rs. 250 in lieu of back wages for the period for which he was kept out of employment. On default, the petitioner was directed to pay the 1st respondent a further sum of Rs. 500 i...
N. Rajamma Vs. Inspector General of Prisons, Trivandrum and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-06-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Ker72
ORDERV.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. The petitioner was the Matron of the After-Care Hostel, Ernakulam from 26-3-1962, till 5-6-1964. A show cause notice (Ex. P 1) was issued to her by the Superintendent of the hostel (3rd Respondent) alleging that she was having illicit and unwholesome relations with certain males and had been repeatedly warned about it. It was stated that on 9-4-1964 when the Superintendent was not in the hostel, she invited one Vikraman Nair for tea and was warned by the Chairman of the Managing Committee (2nd respondent) for having done so.It was also stated that on 2-6-1964, the petitioner lived with Sri Vikraman Nair in Room No. 36 of the Woodlands Annexe, and on enquiries made, this was found to be true, and was also admitted to the Superintendent, by Vikraman Nair himself. On these allegations, the petitioner was asked to submit her explanation for the incident on 2-6-1964. Ext. P-2 is the copy of the petitioner's explanation in which she denied the charge and dema...
Govindan (T.C.) Vs. Inspector of Post Offices and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-04-1967
Reported in: (1967)IILLJ514Ker
P. Govindan Nair, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as an extra-departmental postal mall runner on 6 July 1960 In the Kulathur post office. He was functioning as such till 31 August 1960. On that day he was discharged from the post of mall runner. Subsequently he was appointed as an extra-departmental delivery agent when a vacancy arose and continued In that capacity till his services were terminated by an order dated 2 November 1963, Ex. P. 3. That order la In these terms:Under Rule 6 of the Posts and Telegraphs Extra-departmental Agents (Conduct and Service) Rules, 1959, the services of T.C. Govindan, extra-departmental delivery agent, Kulathur, are nearby terminated with immediate effect.2. In an appeal to respondent 2, the Superintendent of Post Offices, an order Ex. P. 5 was passed stating that there is no reason to cancel the order Ex P. 3. There was a further appeal to the Director of Posts and Telegraphs, Kerala Circle, Trivandrum. That appeal too was dismissed as seen from Ex....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›