Kerala Court May 1967 Judgments
Rathi Varghese Falsely Called Rathi Ponnen Vs. T.J. Ponnen
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-29-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Ker129
Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J. 1. The petitioner in a petition under Section 18 of the Indian Divorce Act (4 of 1869) asking for a declaration of nullity of her marriage with the respondent is the appellant, the ground being that the respondent was impotent at the time of the marriage and at the time of the filing of the petition and therefore there was no consummation of marriage. The learned District Judge of Trivandrum after trial dismissed the petition holding that the evidence adduced is not sufficient to prove that the respondent was impotent at the time of the marriage and at the time of the filing of the petition. The correctness of this finding was challenged before us on behalf of the appellant. 2. Though the petition for declaration of nullity was contested before the learned District Judge by the respondent there was no appearance for him in this Court. The appellant has filed C. M. P. 1055 of 1967 in the appeal for alimony pending the proceedings. The respondent has entered appea...
Tag this Judgment!Vellakutty Vs. Karthyayani and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-29-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Ker170
ORDER1.This motion has arisen in an interlocutory proceeding for a temporary injunction to restrain the defendants from entering the suit properties Along with the institution of the suit, the plaintiff moved for and the Munsif ordered interim injunction on April 7, 1965 On receipt of notice thereof the 2nd defendant entered appearance and prayed for cancellation of the interim injunction as regards plaint Items 1 to 5 to which alone she claimed title and possession. The Munsif allowed that prayer and limited the injunction to concern plaint Items 6 to 9 On appeal by the plaintiff the District Judge, Palghat held the lower court to have gone 'wrong in vacating the interim injunction with regard to Items 1 to 5', and finding the crocs on the properties to have been raised by the 2nd defendant directed the lower court to 'make suitable arrange-ments for harvesting the crops' The 2nd defendant has come up for a revision of that order.(2) The facts are thus: The plaintiff is the first wife...
Tag this Judgment!Poulose (K.V.) Vs. Assistant Educational Officer and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-29-1967
Reported in: (1969)ILLJ632Ker
M.U. Isaac, J.1. This original petition raises the question relating to the validity and applicability of Rule 5 in Chap. XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the rules), made by the Government in exercise of the powers under Section 36 of the Kerala Education Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The petitioner is the manager of an upper primary school. Respondent 4, who was an untrained candidate, was appointed by the petitioner as a teacher in the school during the year 1962-63, after advertising the vacancy and establishing the non-availability of trained hands. Her appointment was approved by respondent 1; and on the basis of this service, she was selected for Teachers' Training course in the department quota. Accordingly, she was relieved from service at the end of the year; and she joined the Teachers' Training course. She completed the course, which is for two years, and passed in the examination held in April 1965. A vacancy arose i...
Tag this Judgment!Eliakutti (P.T.) Vs. St. Francis High School (by Manager) and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-23-1967
Reported in: (1968)ILLJ54Ker
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as a temporary full-time teacher in the St. Francis High School, Mattom, from the academic year l962-63 and continued year after year till the year 1964-66. For the year 1966-66 her appointment was not approved by respondent 2, the District Educational Officer, Chowghat. For the year 1966-67, a post of permanent full-time music teacher for the school was sanctioned and the petitioner was appointed thereto, by respondent 1 from 6 June 1966 and the department's approval was sought by Ex. P 1. It is the petitioner's case that respondent 3, the regional Deputy Director of Public Instruction, issued Ex. p. 2 communication dated 14 June 1966 to the manager, St. Francis High School, Mattom (respondent 1), with copy to respondent 3, stating that respondent 4 has a claim to be appointed full-time music teacher in the school and directing the manager to take appropriate action in the matter. Respondent 2 in turn addressed the manager by Ex...
Tag this Judgment!Srinivasa Printing Works Vs. Sales Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-22-1967
Reported in: [1967]20STC278(Ker)
M.U. Isaac, J.1. These three original petitions raise a common question, namely, whether the amounts received by a printer for execution of job works is taxable under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The parties are the same in all these cases. The petitioner is a printer and a dealer in certain kinds of stationery articles. Some of the articles which he deals with are text-books, exercise books, ledger books, diaries, printed forms required for general purposes etc. He also prints judgments of courts for which the paper is supplied by the petitioner. O.P. Nos. 441 and 931 of 1966 have been filed to quash the orders of final assessments made against the petitioner for the years 1963-64 and 1964-65 respectively. O.P. No. 1450 of 1966 has been filed to quash the notice of provisional assessment and demand made for the year 1965-66. In all these assessments, petitioner claimed, among other things, that the amounts received by him on account of j...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›