Kerala Court July 1974 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.
Sreedharan Nair Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-09-1974
Reported in: (1975)ILLJ310Ker
M.U. Isaac, J.1. The petitioner and the second respondent were both appointed on 31-1 -1967 as principals, Ayurveda colleges. Their appointments are governed by the special rules issued by the Government as per G.O. MS. 481 dated 19th September, 1964. Rule 6 as it stood till it was amended by a notification dated 19-7-1972 provided that every person appointed to the category of a principal among others shall within the period of his probation pass the account test lower if he has not already passed it or account test for subordinate officers Part I of Madras. Both the petitioner and the second respondent had not passed either of the above tests at the time of their appointment. The second respondent had, however, passed the account test for executive officers. The petitioner passed the test in Oct., 1969; and on its basis the Government by an order Ext. PI dated 3-3-1971 declared that the petitioner had satisfactorily completed his probation with effect from 28-10-1969. The second resp...
Krishna Jillai Bhaskaran Nair Vs. Verghese Samuel
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-09-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ104
ORDERKumari P. Janaki Amma, J.1. In proceedings initiated under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at the instance of A party, the Executive First Class Magistrate, Chengannur, after considering reports received from the Tahsildar, Chengannur, passed a conditional order calling upon the B party to cut and remove a coconut tree stated to be in a dangerous condition or in the alternative to show cause why the order should not be made absolute. The B party appeared in court and filed a written statement on 1-12-73 denying the allegations and contending that there was no danger to the property of the A party as alleged. The case stood posted to 15-12-1973 for evidence. On that day the A party was absent. The B party was present. The Magistrate ordered summons to A party. The case came up again on 19-1 -74. The A party was present on that day; but the B party was absent. The court, without any further enquiry into the matter, held that it was necessary to take action as indicated...
K.N. Sadanandan Vs. Raghava Kurup and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-08-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ker2
Gopalan Nambiyar, J.1. Thescope of the high prerogative writ of Habeas Corpus as known to English Law, and the grounds on which it should issue are, we think well settled on the judicial decisions. It is enough to extract the classic observations of Brett, M. R. in In re Agar-ellis v. Lascelles, ((1883) 24 Ch D 317) at page 326 :'It is the universal few of England that if any one person alleges that another is under illegal control by anybody, that person, whoever it may be, may apply for a Habeas Corpus and thereupon the person under whose supposed control, or in whose custody, the person is alleged to be illegally and without his consent is brought before the Court. But the question before the Court upon Habeas corpus is whether the person is in illegal custody without that person's consent.'That was a case where a mothers application that she be allowed the custody and control of her daughter aged nearly 17 years who had been left by the father, under protection of a lady as care-ta...
Sorab Vs. Viswanatha Menon and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-05-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ker99
G. Balagangadharan Nair, J. 1. This appeal by the second defendant arises out of a suit for recovery of the site of a shed, with rent, past and future and certain other reliefs. 2. The shed which bears Municipal No. 306/XXX, stands in a 23 cent plot in Trichur town. There is a building (called hereunder as the Guest House) in this land and it had been rented by the Sitaram Mills for the residence of its Engineer E. S. Mehta. Mehta was conducting a bobbin factory called Mehta Kavina and Co. in a plot on the north belonging to another tavazhi of the plaintiff's tarwad. For the purpose of this factory Mehta was permitted, by the plaintiffs father Kuttan Nair, to erect a shed in the suit property, on a monthly ground rent of Rs. 2.50. Later he was allowed to demolish a portion of the northern compound wall and a portion of the eastern compound wall, on the understanding that he would reconstruct the demolished portions, when he vacated the building. Mehta left the services of the Sitaram M...
New Street Textiles Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-04-1974
Reported in: (1976)ILLJ238Ker
T. Chandrasekhara Menon, J.1. The plaintiff which is a firm engaged in the manufacture and sale of hand-loom clothes is the appellant. The suit was for a prohibitory injunction to restrain the Union of India and the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Trivandrum from taking any steps against the plaintiff for recovery of any amount on the basis of the Employees' Provident Funds Act (hereinafter called the Act). The third defendant, the State of Kerala was impleaded in the suit because it was through the State that defendants 1 and 2 were threatening to take coercive steps.2. The allegations in the plaint were centred on three basic factors :(1) The plaintiff had got a decree against the defendants in O.S. 73 of 1958 of the Cannanore Munsiff Court, confirmed in appeal by the District Court, Tellicherry in A.S. 39/60 of that Court declaring that no amount could be realised from the plaintiff under the Act and restraining the defendants from taking steps to recover any amount from the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›