Kerala Court July 1974 Judgments
Padmanabhan Gangadharan Vs. Mathevan Gangadharan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-31-1974
Reported in: AIR1976Ker49
G. Balagangadharan, J.1. Appellant was the defendant in a suit for malicious prosecution.2. Plaintiff and defendant are doing business in adjacent rooms at Kilimanoor Junction. On 14-6-1963 the defendant preferred a complaint C. C. 125 of 1963 (Ext. P1) in the S. D. M. Court, Attingal against the plaintiff for the offences under Sections 114, 506(ii), 427 and 379, I. P. C. The substance of the complaint was that the previous night (13-6-1963) at about 9 o'clock, the plaintiff and others formed into an unlawful assembly armed with lethal weapons like choppars, sticks, daggers etc. trespassed on his property, destroyed the southern wall of his shop which touched the plaintiff's shop, in order to put a door, and cut off the rafters and at the approach of the defendant the plaintiff rushed at him with a dagger, that the defendant ran off and escaped and that he also intimidated him shouting abuses and threatening to lull him. The motive alleged was that the plaintiff was disappointed at th...
Tag this Judgment!ittoop Varghese Vs. Poulose and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-31-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ker141
Viswanatha Iyer, J. 1. These two appeals arise out of two petitions filed under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act praying that Letters of Administration may be issued under the above Act. One Pavu Ittoop died on 9-9-1964. He was survived by three sons,three daughters and his widow. The eldest son Varghese claimed in O. P. 7 of 1965 that Letters of Administration with copy of the will dated 14-3-1960 executed by the deceased Pavu Ittoop may be issued to him. The second son Poulose filed O. P. 10 of 1965 praying that Letters of Administration with the copy of the will dated 3-3-1964 may be issued to him. The proper execution of the will dated 14-3-1960 is admitted by all the parties. But, the petitioner in O. P. 10 of 1965 contended that the will dated 14-3-1960 stood cancelled by the will dated 3-3-1964 and therefore Letters of Administration cannot be issued under the earlier will. The testamentary validity of the latter will was questioned by the eldest son Varghese. The lower ...
Tag this Judgment!The Kerala Wakf Board Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-25-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ker123
Govindan Nair, C.J.1. These appeals arise from a common judgment of P. Subramonian Poti, J. in original petitions Nos. 2412/71, 4915/74, 3440/73, 5053/71, 4102, 4716, 3746, 5972, 4075, 4070, 1694, 4705 and 4129 of 1971, 1629/72 and 4420 of 1971 by which Sections 3 (g) and 46 of the Wakf Act, 1954 (for short the Act) as amended by the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 1969 have been declared to be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.2. For the purpose of considering the questions raised, the petitioners before the learned Judge agreed to treat original petition No. 2412/71 as typical of the petitions and rested their arguments on the basis of the facts stated in the affidavits and the petition, in that case There were two petitioners in that petition who were interested in the 8 schedule properties in the will executed by late Abdul Sathar Hajee Moosa Sait on 25-2-1099 (sic). Those properties formed the properties of the Dharmasthapanam described as the Abdul Sathar Hajee Moosa Sai...
Tag this Judgment!Fodd Inspector Vs. Seetharam Rice and Oil Mils and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-23-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ479
ORDERKader, J.1. These criminal appeals, revision petitions and the criminal miscellaneous petition raise certain points of great importance relating to the scope of and procedure contemplated under Section 20-A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, which will hereinafter be referred to, for brevity, the Act.2. The points which fall for determination are:(i) What is the scope of Section 20-A, of the Act; and(ii) What is the procedure to be followed in the matter of trial of a case coming under this section. In other words, does this section envisage a joint trial of the vendor along with the manufacturer, distributor or the dealer of any article of food.3. The relevant and material facts necessary for the disposal of these criminal appeals, revisions and miscellaneous petition can be stated in a short compass:Cri. Appeals Nos. 222,223 and 225 to 227 of 1973 are directed against the acquittals of the vendors in these cases; the appellant in all these cases being the Food Ins...
Tag this Judgment!Kadalaya Manakkal Moorthi Narayanan Nambudiripad Vs. State of Kerala a ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-22-1974
Reported in: AIR1976Ker51
ORDERGeorge Vadakkel, J.1. Petitioner is the karnavan of an Illom, and is the hereditary trustee of the several devaswoms mentioned in paragraph 2 of the petition. Respondents Nos. 3 to 24 filed petitions invoking the provisions of Section 25 (2), of the Thiruppuvaram Payment (Abolition)' Act, 1969 (for short, the Act). Along with these petitions they have also deposited amounts equal to arrears of thiruppuvaram due from them in respect of one year, In this manner, these respondents, seek to get full discharge of their liability for arrears of thiruppuvaram which have accrued due prior to 1-1-1970 on which date the Act came into force as per notification S. R. O. No. 12/1970 dated 1-1-1970 issued under Section 1 (3) of the Act, and published in the Kerala Gazette Extraordinary dated 1-1-1970. The discharge sought for is as against the petitioner, in some instances in his capacity as Illom karnavan, and in others on his capacity as hereditary trustee of one or the other of the devaswoms...
Tag this Judgment!Premier Tyres Limited Vs. V.A. Abraham
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-19-1974
Reported in: (1976)ILLJ161Ker
T. Chandrasekhara Menon, J.1. An award of the Industrial Tribunal, Calicut in respect of the dispute between the Management of the Premier Tyres Limited, Kalamasseri and their workman Shri V.A. Abraham has given rise to these two original petitions. By the said award marked as Ext. P1 in both the petitions, the Tribunal found that the service of the workman concerned has been terminated by the management illegally and improperly. The Tribunal held that though ordinarily the workman would have been entitled to reinstatement, in consideration of the fact that the person concerned worked as the head of the security department and as the management's contentions would indicate that the relationship between the management and the workman had become strained, the Tribunal thought it was just and proper in this case to order the management only to pay two months wages for each completed year of service or any part thereof in excess of six months. This was by way of substantial compensation in...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala Vs. Parameswaran Pillai Vasudevan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-18-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ97
Narayana Pillai, J.1. This appeal by the State is from the acquittal of the respondent by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Attingal, of an offence punishable under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'.2. On June 12, 1972, the respondent sold to the Food Inspector of the Elakamon Panchayat, P.W. 1, 660 m. 1. of cow milk. After complying with the formalities prescribed by law and adding the necessary preservative the sample was sent to the Public Analyst for examination. He received it on June 15, and after analysis issued the report, Ext. P/5, on June 19, 1072, declaring the result as follows:Milk fat ... 4.8%Milk Solids-non-fat ... 7.7% Starch and Sugar ... Absent,and Freezing point(Hortvet's method) ... 0.48 C.and expressing his opinion thus:The said sample does not conform to the standards prescribed for cow's milk under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 and is therefore adulterated.The sample contains not less than nine per cent (...
Tag this Judgment!Shylaja Vs. Jayamohanathilakan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-17-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ker1
Govindan Nair, C.J. 1. A very short question is raised for determination in this Civil Revision Petition by a Hindu wife governed by the Madras Marumakkathayam Act who married the respondent on 26-4-1970 at Guruvayoor situate in what was originally known as South Malabar and the husband was admittedly governed by the Cochin Makka-thayam Thiyya Act, XVII of 1115, for short, the Act. The respondent filed an application under Section 14 of the Act for divorce. It was objected to by the revision petitioner on the ground that the Act will not apply to her and the application was not maintainable. Though the points urged before us in detail were not taken in the objection in that the arguments as such were not mentioned therein, the objection was taken that the revision petitioner was not governed by the Act. Counsel for the petitioner elaborated it by invitingour attention to the preamble to the Act as well as to Section 2 thereof. From the preamble it is clear that the Act will apply only ...
Tag this Judgment!A. Abdul Rahim, Travancore Confectionery Works Vs. Commissioner of Inc ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-16-1974
Reported in: [1977]110ITR595(Ker)
Govindan Nair, C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, CochinBench, has referred the following question to the High Court for itsopinion: 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the withdrawal of the development rebate, under Section 155(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, amounting to Rs. 424, Rs. 1,696, Rs. 4,223, Rs. 440 and Rs. 11,674 for the assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64, 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1967-68, respectively, by the Income-tax Officer was justified '2. For the years mentioned in the question formulated by the Tribunal, the assessee was one Abdul Rahim. He carried on a business in manufacture and sale of confectionery items in the name of M/s. Travancore Confectionery Works, Quilon. The accounting period for each of the years was the Malayalam year ending on the 16th of August of each year. On January 1, 1967, the assessee formed a partnership with his son as his partner. There was a deed of partnership executed on...
Tag this Judgment!C.G.G. Panicker Vs. T.M. Eapen and Two ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-11-1974
Reported in: (1975)ILLJ126Ker
V. Khalid, J.1. The petitioner, a partnership firm, seeks the issuance of a writ of certiorari or other writ or order to quash Ext. P 12 order dated 9-3-1972, passed by the Labour Court, Quilon. The first respondent was appointed as a stenographer and was confirmed on 1-11.1958. For alleged acts of misbehaviour and indiscipline, his services were terminated by an order Ext. P 1 dated 21-1-1961: He filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority under Section 41(2) of the Travancore-Cochin Shops and Establishments Act, 1125, as appeal No. 4 of 1961. The appellate authority set aside the order of termination by its order Ext. P 2 dated 19th May, 1962. Pursuant to Ext. P 2 order, the first respondent sent a notice to the petitioner on 17-7-1962 making a claim for the salary for the period from January, 1961 to June, 1962 and for other benefits. The petitioner replied to him by notice dated 128-7-1962 denying liability and asserting that [termination order did not provide for reinstatement ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »