Kerala Court January 1969 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.
Marggarate Maria Pulparampil Nee Feldman Vs. Dr. Chacko Pulparampil an ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-24-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker1
Govindan Nair, J. 1. This is a petition by a German mother for the custody of her two children, the daughter Konstanze, aged about 41/2 years, and the son Thomas Markus who is nearing but haying not yet attained the age of 3. The petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the prayers are that a Writ of Habeas Corpus be issued to the respondents to produce the children before this Court and that a further direction be given to hand over the children to the custody of the mother. The father of the children is the 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent is the father of the 1st respondent, and the 3rd respondent is the wife of the 2nd respondent, the 2nd respondent having married again after the death of the 1st respondent's mother. A Division Bench of this Court before which this petition came up along with C. M. P. 143 of 1968 for the issue of 3 mandatory injunction ordered on C. M. P. 143 of 1908 on 4-1-1968, that the respondents produce the children before this Court at...
Peerukannu Shahul Hameed and ors. Vs. Osanaru Pillai Ahammed Kannu and ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-23-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker81
Narayana Pillai, J.1. The suit filed on the strength of Ext. F, a hypothecation bond dated 12-3-1923, for redemption of 2 earlier mortgages dated 29-4-1909 and 11-2-1910 of the same properties and copies of which are Exts. XI and XII, was dismissed by both the lower Courts and it is from these decrees that the present Second Appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs.2. The transactions took place in the erstwhile Travancore State. Under Article 119 of the Travancore Limitation Act, 6 of 1100 (M. E.), the appellants had 12 years' time to recover through suit the money due under Ext. F. That was not availed of by them. According to the learned Advocate General who appeared for them Ext. F was a mortgage by conditional sale, ft had worked itself out as a sale and therefore they as owners of the properties had a right to redeem the earlier mortgages even though the right to claim the amount due under Ext. F had become barred by limitation. He argued that even if Ext. F had become barred unde...
Executive Officer, Elavally Panchayat Vs. Smt. Rosa
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-22-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker88; 1970CriLJ470
M.U. Isaac, J. 1. These three cases are the sequence of a criminal complaint which the Executive Officer of Elavally Panchayat, (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) instituted as C. C. No. 248 of 1967 in the Sub-Magistrate's Court, Chowghat against one Smt. Rosa (hereinafter referred to as the respondent).2. The respondent is the owner of a rice mill. The rice-milling industry is regulated by the Rice Milling Industry (Regulation) Act, 1958. She sot a permit under Section 5 and a license under Section 6 of the Rice Milling Industry (Regulation) Act for the establishment of a rice mill within the Elavally Panchayat; and accordingly she established a rice mill. Section 96 of the Kerala Panchayats Act, 1960 provides that the Panchayat may with the previous approval of the Director notify that no place in the Panchayat area shall be used for any of the purposes specified in the rules madein this behalf being purposes for which in the opinion of the Government, are likely to be offens...
The Good Land Plantation (Private) Ltd., Puthupally Village Vs. State ... Overruled
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-20-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker43
Isaac, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff from the judgment of a learned Judge of this Court. The suit was originally instituted in the Munsiff's Court. Kottayam; but it was withdrawn to his Court under Article 228 of the Constitution, as it involved a question regarding the Constitutional validity of Sub-section (10) of Section 45 of the Banking Companies Act, 1949.2. The plaintiff was a subscriber in a chitty conducted by the Kottayam Orient Bank Ltd. The conduct of the chitty was governed by the Travancore Chitties Act, 1120, under which the foreman has to register a 'Variola' which is the articles of agreement between him and the subscribers. Ext P-1 is the Variola in this case. This chitty was started on 10-9-1960, with 50 tickets of Ra 400/- each, and monthly Instalments falling on the 10th of each English month. The prize for each instalment was to be determined by auction held on the previous instalment. The plaintiff auctioned its ticket on 10-12-1960 for Rs. 12,000/-: an...
P.D. Palakattumala Devaswom, Represented by the Secy. Travancore Devas ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-17-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker30
Raman Nayar, J.1. These are appeals brought against decisions of 'the Court' (in each case, a Subordinate Judge) in land acquisition proceedings, five of them under the provisions of the Kerala Land Acquisition Act, 1961 which we shall hereafter call the Kerala Act, and the remaining five under the provisions of the (Travancore) Land Acquisition Act, 1089 which we shall hereafter call the Travancore Act. (With the exception of one provision, namely, Section 60 of the Kerala Act, the provisions of these two statutes are, so far as we are here concerned, the same as the provisions of the Central Act, namely, the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and, in discussing matters covered by identical provisions of the three statutes, we shall refer to the older, better known, and more widely and more authoritatively construed provisions of the Central Act). In all the ten cases, the value of the subject-matter of the proceeding is (or is assumed to be) not over Rs. 10,000/-. The appeals have not been ...
Puthan Veettil Sankaran Nair Vs. Poomulli Manakkal Moopil Sthanam Para ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-10-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker57
P. Narayana Pillai, J. 1. The 6th defendant in O. S. 474 of 1954 on the file of the Munsif. Alatur, is the appellant in S. A. 463 of 1966. The plaintiff in that suit is the petitioner in C. R P. 90 of 1968. He is also the plaintiff in another suit. O. S. 391 of 1951, on the file of the same court. C. R. P. 83 of 1968 is a revision petition filed by him from an order passed in O. S, 391 of 1951. The Second Appeal is from an order passed by the Munsif adjourning the case for confirmation of the sale which was held in execution. The Revision Petitions relate to orders passed by him in the 2 suits amending the decrees in those cases.2. The facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal and the revision petitions are as follows: The plaint schedule properties in the 2 suits are identical and they belong to the plaintiff. On the date of the 2 suits they were outstanding on lease with the Sub-tarwad of defendants 2 to 5 and 7. Defendants 3 to 5 and 7 are the children of the 2nd and 6th defend...
The President, the Commonwealth Co-operative Society Ltd., Ernakulam V ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-09-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Ker34
ORDERK.K. Mathew, J.1. The petitioner challenges an order passed by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies under Section 51(1) of the Travancore-Cochin Co-operative Societies Act, 1951 (Act 10 of 1952), hereinafter referred to as the Act, winding up the co-operative society in question and appointing a liquidator to manage its affairs. The appeal preferred before the Government against the order was dismissed by Ext. P2 order.2. The only contention raised by the petitioner is that the society should have been given notice of the proceeding to wind it up and as no such notice was given, the proceeding is bad. Section 51(1) of the Act is as follows:'If the Registrar, after an enquiry has been held under Section 45 or after an inspection has been made under Section 46 or on receipt of an application made by three-fourths of the members of a registered society, is of opinion that the society ought to be wound up, he may issue an order in writing directing it to be wound up, and when...
George A. Leslie and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-09-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker21
Mathew, J.1. Linwood and Shendurni Estates in Kulathupuzha Village, Pathanapuram Taluk, belonged at the relevant time to a partnership. The firm appointed the 2nd petitioner as Its agent to manage the estates The aforesaid estates formed part of a bigger estate known as Herford Estate, covering an area of 374.83 acres. The land comprised in that estate belonged to the erstwhile Government of Travancore and was assigned under the Rules for the sale of Waste Land on the Travancore Hills dated 24th April 1965 to three persons by Ext. P-l dated 29-12-1877.2. The question of the right of the grantees in respect of trees other than the royal trees enumerated in Ext. P-l, hereinafter called the reserved trees, in this and similar grants was raised by the planters, and the Government of Travancore in their proceedings R. O. C. No. 161/1921/Rev. dt. 28 9 1923 corresponding to 12-3-1099 M. E, held that on payment of timber value of the reserved trees at a flat rate of Rs. 35/- per acre of wooded...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›