Kerala Court April 1968 Judgments
Chori Ouso Vs. Sasoon Helegua and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-05-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Ker11
Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J. The common question that arises in all the cases is whether a varamdar defined in the latter portion of Section 2, Sub-section (60) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (Act 1 of 1964) has got the right to file an application for the determination of 'fair rent' under Section 31 of the said Act. Section 2 (13) of Act 1 of 1964 defines 'fair rent' as meaning 'the rent payable by a cultivating tenant under Section 27 or Section 33' of the Act.2. In the orders which are the subject-matter of C. R. Ps. 675 to 678 of 1966 the Subordinate Judge took the view that the cultivating tenant has no such right. Though the same question is raised in C. R. Ps. 1174 and 1175 of 1966 the point was not raised before the appellate Judge. In the Original petitions which challenge the orders of the Land Tribunal, Moovattupuzha, the Land Tribunal conceded the right to the Varamdar'.3. The latter portion of Section 2 (60) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (Act 1 of 1964), hereinaft...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: State of Kerala, Vs. Executive Officer, Nediyiruppu Panchayat
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-05-1968
Reported in: 1969CriLJ486
Isaac, J. 1. These two cases have come before us pursuant to an order of reference made by our learned brother Sadasivan, J. The question arising for decision relates to the validity of Rule 3 of the Kerala Panchayats (Trial of Offences by Magistrates) Rules 1904, as it stood before its recent amendment as per Notification G.O.Ms. 440/67/DD dated 14-12-1967. 2. We shall briefly state the circumstances under which the above references have been made. Section 74 of the Kerala Panchayats Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) provides for the recovery of arrear of tax, cess etc. due to a Panchayat; and prosecution of the defaulter before a Magistrate is one of the modes provided thereunder. Section 129 o the Act contains the rule-making power of the Government; and Section 129 (2), Clause (xxxix) reads as follows:- '129(2). In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoingpower, the Government may make rules--x x x x X (xxxix) as to the class of Magistrates ...
Tag this Judgment!Karthyayani Vs. Raman and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-05-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Ker213
T.S. Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J.1. The question raised in the second appeal is whether the decree in O. S. 91 of 1953 filed by the second defendant against Sankaran and the first defendant is valid and binding on the plaint items which belonged to Sankaran. O. S. 91 of 1953 is a suit to enforce a mortgage executed by Sankaran. The plaintiff is the daughter of Sankaran. The mortgage was executed by Sankaran in 1122 to the second defendant, and immediately thereafter he left for Ceylon and according to the plaintiff he was not heard of thereafter and there is therefore, a presumption under Section 108 of the Evidence Act that he is dead. Though the learned Munsiff accepted the plea of the plaintiff the learned Judge overruled the same. The suit in O. S. 91 of 1953 was filed on 11-2-1953 and the decree therein is dated 19-5-1953. In execution of the decree the property was sold and purchased by the second defendant who subsequentlytransferred the same to defendants 3 and A for the benefit of ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala, Ernakulam Vs. Travancore Sugars an ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-05-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Ker196
K.K. Mathew, J.1. The assessee here is a limited company incorporated under the Travancore Companies Regulation and is carrying on the business of manufacturing sugar. It also runs a distillery and a tincture factory. The assessee-company was floated with a view to take over the business assets of a company called Travancore Sugars Ltd., which was being wound up and in which the State Government held the largest number of shares, the Government Distillery at Nagercoil and the business assets of the Government Tincture Factory at Triyandrum. An agreement was entered into between the Government of Travancore and Sir William Wright on behalf of Parry & Co. Ltd.. the promoters of the assessee-company. Under the agreement, the assets of all the three concerns were agreed to be sold by the Government of Travancore to the assessee-Company. It is not necessary to set out all the clauses in the agreement. Apart from the cash consideration for the transfer of the assets, Clause 7 of the agreemen...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. Kundumkara Govindan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-05-1968
Reported in: 1969CriLJ818
T.C. Raghavan, J.1. These appeals arise out of two Sessions cases disposed of by the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Kasargod. The Assistant Sessions Judge acquitted the respondents, each of whom was the accuaed person in each of the Sessions cases. The charge against them was that they committed rape on Pw. I (Narayani) aged fourteen on 25th June 1966 at about 5,80 p. m. one after the other at the house of the respondent in the second of these appeals (Kunhikannan alias Kannan Nair). The case was that Pw. 1, a dhobi girl, took washed clothes to the house of Kannan Nair, while the respondent in the first of these appeals (Govindan alias Govindan Hair) was also present; that they took the girl foroibly inside the house of Kannan Nair and laid her on a gunny spread on the ground; and that they committed rape on her one after the other. Pw. 1 returned home weeping; but did not disclose the incident to her mother, Pw. 2. She became unwell; and her mother Bulleting something wrong with...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala Vs. Travancore Sugars and Chemicals ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-05-1968
Reported in: [1969]71ITR385(Ker)
RAGHAVAN J. - This reference came before a Division Bench of this court (M. S. Menon C.J. and Madhavan Nair J.) in August, 1963; and this court answered the question referred 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the payment of Rs. 42,480 by the assessee to the Travancore Government under the agreements dated June 18, 1937, and January 28, 1947, was allowable under section 10 of the Income-tax Act ?' in the negative against the assessee - company. The company took up the matter before the Supreme Court; and the Supreme Court allowed the appeal. This court, relying mainly on the preamble to the agreement between the company and the Government of Travancore which contained an expression that the payment was 'also in consideration' held that the expenditure was not of a revenue nature, but of a capital nature, in other words, towards the unpaid portion of the purchase price. In view of that, this court did not consider the other contention raised by the revenue that...
Tag this Judgment!ittyanath Madathil Madhavi Vs. Sree Rama Varma
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-03-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Ker256
ORDERV.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. This is an application for Letters of Administration with the will annexured in respect of the assets and estate of the late Maharaja of Cochin, Sri Ramavarma, alias Rama Varma Pareekshit Thampuran, who died on the 12th November 1964, at the Hill Palace, Trippunithura, within the jurisdiction of this Court. The petitioner is the widow of the deceased. The deceased left no son or daughter or other lineal descendants or mother, and the petitioner is the sole heir of the deceased under the Hindu Succession Act by which he was governed. The deceased executed a will dated 3rd May 1952 under which he made two specific bequests of the properties described in schedules A and B of the will in favour respectively, of the petitioner and the widow of a deceased nephew, who was formerly the Palace Controller. The properties covered by these schedules in the will were later assigned to the legatees under documents dated 8-4-54 and 29-4-54 with rights of absolute owne...
Tag this Judgment!Stanley Mendex Vs. Glovanola Binny Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-03-1968
Reported in: (1968)IILLJ470Ker
V. Balakrishna Eradi, J.1. The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition seeking to quash an award made by the industrial tribunal, Calicat, dismissing a compliant put in by him under Section 88A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The petitioner had been appointed as a welder in the service of respondent-company on probation, the period of probation being one year commencing from 27 May 1964. On 24 May 1965, the management proposed to terminate the petitioner's employment with effect from 24 May 1965 which date marked the end of the probationary period, the reason stated by the management being that the petitioner's work was found to be unsatisfactory. The petitioner sought to challenge this order before the industrial tribunal on the ground that it was passed in violation of the provisions of Section 83 of the Industrial Disputes Act inasmuch as an Industrial dispute-Industrial Dispute No. 48 of 1966-was pending before the tribunal w...
Tag this Judgment!Mathai Vs. Assistant Educational Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-03-1968
Reported in: (1969)ILLJ220Ker
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. The writ petition, as amended, seeks to quash Exs. P. 1, P. 2, R. 3 and R. 4. The details and nature of these exhibits will be referred to presently. The petitioner was an assistant teacher of the M.T.L.P. School, Naranammoozhy. His date of birth is 6 December 1910. By reason of the benefits conferred in the first instance on Government servants by G.O. No. 324 of 1966 and extended later to others, the petitioner was entitled to continue in service till completion of the age of 58 years. After the age of superannuation was thus raised, the petitioner had opted for the benefit of Chap. XIV-C of the Kerala Education Rules. Thereafter, by G.O. No. 176 of 1967, dated 4 May 1967, the age of superannuation in regard to the Government servants was reduced from 58 to 55. This was followed in other departments including private-aided institutions like the one where the petitioner was employed. Government Order No. 176 of 1967, contained a provision by which persons c...
Tag this Judgment!Gopala Panikkar Thankappan and ors. Vs. the State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-01-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Ker29; 1969CriLJ116
ORDERT.C. Raghavan, J.1. On 22nd July 1967 a person by name Damodara Pillai lodged a first information statement (a complaint) against the three petitioners, four others whose names were also mentioned in the complaint and 12 more who could be identified but whose names were not known under Section 395 of the Penal Code. The police registered a ease and started investigation. Ultimately, on 9th October 1967 the police filed a charge-sheet against the four other persons mentioned by name in the complaint, dropping the petitioner, under Section 379 of the Penal Code road with Section 31 thereof. The petitioners were mentioned as witnesses 5, 6 and 7. When the trial commenced, the counsel of the four accused persons who were accused persons 1. 5. 0 and 7 in the complaint, contended that the dropping of the petitioners from the array of accused persons was mala fide and illegal. The counsel also contended that the real culprits were the petitioners. Alter hearing arguments of the counsel i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »