Kerala Court July 1970 Judgments
Manjeri Kovilakath Manavallabhan Karanamulpad Manjeri and anr. Vs. the ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-31-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker257
Krishnamoorthy Iyer. J. 1. These court-fee references under Section 11 of the Kerala Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 (referred to as the Kerala Act) raise a question of construction of Section 51 of the said Act.2. Section 51 of the Kerala Act reads:'The fee payable under this Act on a memorandum of appeal against an order relating to compensation under any Act for the time being in force for the acquisition of property for public purposes shall be computed on the difference between the amount awarded and the amount claimed by the appellant.'3. The point to be decided is whether the appellants are bound to include in their valuation of the appeals the statutory solatium of 15% on the market value which they are entitled to get under the Land Acquisition Act on the excess compensation claimed in the appeals and pay court-fee thereon.4. In Brahmanandam v. Secy. of State, AIR 1930 Mad 45 Anantakrishna Ayyar, J., took the view based on Section 8 of the Central Court-fees Act (Act ...
Tag this Judgment!Kaveri Amma Vs. Parameswari Amma and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-29-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker216
P. Subramonian Poti, J.1. The Interesting Question that arises for decision in this Second Appeal is whether a Hindu widow who had obtained a decree for maintenance charged on certain properties of the joint family is entitled to claim enhanced maintenance out of these properties later, on the plea that the circumstances have altered justifying enhancement of maintenance when the properties have passed into the hands of an alienee purchasing for consideration with notice of the decree obtained by the widow for maintenance. The trial Court found that the widow, who is the plaintiff, was entitled to sue for enhancement of maintenance. But the appellate court has reversed this and has dismissed the suit. This appeal is by the widow who has been as non-suited by the appellate decision.2. One Kaveri Amma, who was the plaintiff, married one Vishnu Bhatta who died leaving the plaintiff a widow at a very early age. The joint family of Vishsu Bhatta was possessed of extensive properties. Kaveri...
Tag this Judgment!Kelan's son Kodakkat Kannan and Ors. Vs. Tharakandi Kadissa and Ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-24-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker61
Raman Nayar, C.J.1. The question in these appeals (arising out of two suits for arrears of rent between the same parties in respect of the same holding but for different periods) is whether, in a suit for recovery of arrears of rent in enforcement of the chargeconferred by Section 39 of the Malabar Tenancy Act, a decree can be made for the sale of the holding free of the interest of a tenant of the defaulting tenant, in other words, of a sub-tenant, the sub-tenant being party to the suit. The courts below have answered this question in the affirmative rejecting the plea of the defendants sub-tenants that there should be a reservation of their interest. The sub-tenants have come to this Court by way of second appeal, and their appeals have been referred first to a Division Bench and then to a Full Bench for answering the question.2. Section 39 by which the charge is conferred reads thus:39. Arrears of michavaram and rent to be a first charge on holding after revenue.--Arrears of michava...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. E. Bhaskaran Kunhikelu
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-20-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker188; 1971CriLJ955
Narayana Pillai, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of acquittal. The allegation in the complaint filed by P. W. 1, the Wireless licensing Inspector, Tellicherry, before the Sub-Magistrate. Tellicherry-I was that the respondent had committed offences punishable under Section 4 read with Section 20 of the Indian Telegraph Act, XIII of 1885 and Section 3 read with Section 6 of the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, XVII of 1933. The Sub Magistrate convicted the respondent on both the counts. For the offence under the Telegraph Act he sentenced the respondent to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. No separate sentence was awarded for the offence under the Wireless Telegraphy Act. In the appeal filed by the respondent before the District Magistrate, Tellicherry, his convictions and sentence were set aside. This appeal is from that judgment.2. Section 20 of the Telegraph Act and Section 6 of the Wireless Telegraphy Act prescribe respectively...
Tag this Judgment!K. Ramanujan Nair Vs. S. Sarojini Amma and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-15-1970
Reported in: 1971CriLJ565
T.C. Raghavan, J.1. The criminal revision petition arises in rather special circumstances.2. The petitioner is the husband and the first respondent the wife. On the allegation that the petitioner married a second time when the marriage between the petitioner and the first respondent was still subsisting, the first respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner Under Section 494 of the Penal Code. The second wife and three others who were said to have abetted the second marriage were also made accused persons. The complaint was filed before the Additional First Class Magistrate's Court, Trivandrum. All the prosecution witnesses were examined; and on 12th September 1989 the Magistrate discharged accused persons 2 to 5 and adjourned the case for defence evidence of the petitioner to 13thFebruary 1970. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition questioning the territorial jurisdiction of the Court to try the offence. It was on that petition that the impugned order was passed, the Mag...
Tag this Judgment!P.T. Ramankutty Achan Vs. Kalyanikutty
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-06-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Ker22; 1971CriLJ318
ORDERP. Narayana Pillai, J. 1. Both the parties to this revision petition, the petitioner, Ramankutty Achan, whom for convenience T shall call Achan, and his wife, Kalyanikutty, who is the respondent, are learners. Their marriage took place in 1953. From 14-1-1968 they began to live separate. So long as love persisted there was little need of law to rule the relations between them. But as love flew out of the window the lawyer stepped in through the door. On 26-10-1968 Kallianikutty applied before the District Magistrate, Palghat, for granting maintenance to her andher three children. Her application was resisted by Achan. The District Magistrate granted maintenance to Kallianikutty at the rate of Rs. 25/- and to each of the children at the rate of Rs. 20/- per month. Aggrieved by it Achan has filed this revision petition.2. After deductions from the salary of Achan which is Rs. 285/- he gets Rs. 240.63 every month. The monthly salary of Kallianikutty also is Rs. 285/-. Out of it after...
Tag this Judgment!Narayana Pillai Vs. State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-01-1970
Reported in: 1971CriLJ168
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. The appellant, Narayana Pillai aged 22, has been convicted by the Sessions Judge of Qui'lon for the murder of one Krishna Pillai by stabbing him with a tapping knife on 13-8-69 at about 7.30 p.m. and sentenced to imprisonment for life. He has also been convicted Under Section 324, Penal Code for causing hurt to P.Ws. 2 and 5 in the course of the occurrence and sentenced to rigorus imprisonment for three months and one month respectively. The sentences are directed to run concurrently.2. Deceased Krishna Pillai was a tea-shop keeper in Yayakkala at Oommannoor Village. He was residing with his wife and 6 children in Sarojavilasom house, about half a mile from Vayakkala jucotion, where he was conducting the tea-shop. The accused was their neighbour and was friendly with the deceased's wife P.W. 2, Krishna Pillai will leave his houae on all dajs at about 7 am. and return only by about 9-30 or 10 in the night with a break at 10'clock for lunch. All the children a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›