Kerala Court March 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.
K. Prabhakaran Nair Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-31-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker27; (1970)ILLJ522Ker
Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J. 1. Thepetitioner in the original petition apart from seeking to quash Ext. P3 passed by the second respondent rejecting the petitioner's representation Ext. P2 which questioned the promotion of the persons referred to therein as Sheristadar, District Court in the Travan core-Cochin area, has also prayed for being promoted as Sheristadar. District Court in the Travan-Cochin area earlier than respondents 3 to 8 in view of his alleged preferential claim based upon law qualification. The petitioner entered service in the Judicial Department of the erstwhile Travancore State on 25-12-1118. He passed the Travancore Account Test in 1119 M. E., graduated in 1959 and took the B. L. Degree in April 1962. By seniority he was appointed Sheristadar of the Sub-Court in the Travancore-Cochin area in March 1963. The petitioner's case is that ac-cording to the rule in force in the Tra-vancore State and subsequently in the Travancore-Cochin State and also followed in the State of...
P.B. Kader and ors. Vs. Thatchamma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-25-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker241
Krishna Iyer, J. 1. The parties to these appeals invite the Court to evaluate life, which is priceless, by the negative device of assessing the loss inflicted by death on those who lived on the deceased's longevity. In this mundane world, even the irreparable can be repaired somewhat by money and the law computes compensation for loss of life as 'a hard matter of pounds, shillings and pence', based not on 'sentimental damage, bereavement or pain or suffering' but on 'a reasonable expectation of pecuniary benefit as of right or otherwise, from the continuance of the life'. 2. A stage carriage, belonging to the 1st defendant-company, was plying, with lethal rashness, on the Vypeen-Pallipuram road on the ill-starred day, the 12th December, 1959. This lovely island has but rugged roads and the working-class denizens, who make a livelihood by employment outside the island, depend largely on buses for their daily journeys. Three such workmen by name Ande Chouro, Joseph Sylvian and Pathrose R...
Govindji J. Khona Vs. K. Damodaran and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-20-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker229
Narayana Pillai, J.1. The appellant, Govindji J. Khona, Partner in Messrs. Govindji Jevat & Co., Bombay, sued the Respondents, the 1st Respondent being K. Damodaran, an industrialist at Cannanore and the 2nd Respondent, The Cannanore Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd., in the Sub-ordinate Judge's Court, Ernakulam for that the 1st Respondent acting as the Managing agent of the 2nd Respondent falsely and maliciously and without any reasonable or probable cause prosecuted the appellant and 2 other persons, Sippy and Krishna Shetty, upon a charge of having conspired together and cheated him of a large sum of money. The learned Subordinate Judge dismissed with costs the suit which was for recovery of Rs. 1,50,000.2. The complex facts of which this story is made up are as follows: The appellant is a dealer in cotton, doing business at Bombay. Krishna Chetty and Sippy, describing themselves as commission agents at Coimba-tore, offered to sell to the Respondents certain varieties of cotton in which...
Joseph Chacko Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-19-1969
Reported in: [1970]77ITR610(Ker)
K.K. Mathew, J. 1. Section 2(a) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act runs as follows : ' ' Agricultural income ' means- (1) any rent or revenue derived from land which is used for agricultural purposes; and is either assessed to land revenue in the State or subject to a local rate assessed and collected by officers of the State Government as such. (2) any income derived from such land by- (i) agriculture, or (ii) the performance by a cultivator or receiver of rent-in-kind of any process ordinarily employed by a cultivator or receiver of rent-in-kindto render the produce raised or received by him At to be taken to market, or (iii) the sale by a cultivator or receiver of rent-in-kind of the produce raised or received by him, in respect of which no process has been performed other than a process of the nature described in Sub-clause (ii)....' 2. The contention of the petitioner in this petition is that the land in question belongs to the Government, that the petitioner has entered the la...
G. Appukkuttan Pillai Vs. Government of India and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-06-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker110
Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. This writ petition has been ordered to be placed before a Full Bench as it raises an important question as to the nature of the power exercised by the Central Government in the matter of integration of services in the States. In M.A. Jaleel v. State of Mysore, AIR 1961 Mys 210, a Division Bench of the Mysore High Court took the view that the power of the Central Government in the matter of integration of services was an exclusive original power. There were observations in a different strain made by one of us (Raman Nayar J.) in Kunhi Krishnan Nambiyar v. State of Kerala, 1964 Ker LT 704 = AIR 1965 Ker 84 (FB). In this latter case the Mysore decision was not noticed, nor were the provisions of Article 4 of the Constitution. In view of all this our learned brother Mathew J. felt that the question should be decided by a Full Bench.2. The petitioner was appointed Municipal Commissioner in the Travancore State in the year 1945 for a term of three years, renewed in 194...
Cherla Poulose Koovapally Kattavil Vs. K.P. Sathiavan Nair and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-04-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ker94
Krishnamoorthy Iyer, J. 1. The appellant who is the stranger-auction purchaser in execution of the decree in O. S. 15 of 1964 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge's Court, Ernakulam, complains against the dismissal of E. A. 813 of 1968 filed by him under Section 151, Order 21, Rules 90 and 91 C. P. C. to set aside the Court sale. The properties of the third defendant were purchased by the appellant in Court auction on 11-11-1968 for Rs. 9280.70 and he deposited Rs. 2321 being l/4th of the auction amount under Order 21. Rule 84 C. P. C. E. A. 813 of 1968 was filed on. 18-11-1968 on the ground that the leasehold interest created by the 3rd defendant in the property in 1960 was not disclosed in the sale Proclamation and its. non-disclosure is an act of fraud practised by the decree-holder and the 3rd' defendant on the intending purchasers and the court and therefore the sale is liable to be set aside. In E. A. 813 of 1968 the appellant also prayed for the return of the sum of Rs...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›