Kerala Court December 1977 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.
The Inspector of Post Office Alleppey Nath and ors. Vs. V. Ranganathan ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-23-1977
Reported in: AIR1979Ker31
Subramonian Poti, J. 1. This is an appeal against the decision of Chandrasekhara Menon J. quashing the order of termination of the services of the respondent and directing reinstatement with effect from 8-2-1968 with all consequential benefits. Respondent who was the petitioner in the Original Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was a postman in the Posts and Telegraphs Department. He was a temporary civil servant. He was governed by the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, His services were terminated under Rule 5 (1) of the said rules by Ext. P-4 order. Representation against Ext. P-4 order was rejected by the Chairman, Postsand Telegraphs Board, New Delhi, the 3rd appellant in the appeal. Ext. P-10 is the communication concerning such rejection. Ext. P-4 order as confirmed by Ext, P-10 was challenged in the Original Petition and that challenge succeeded before the learned single Judge. 2. The learned Judge has found that in the circumstances in which th...
Kunjuraman Nair Vs. Secretary to Labour Department and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-22-1977
Reported in: (1978)IILLJ274Ker
T. Chandrasekhara Menon, J.1. The General Secretary of the Automobile Employees Association has filed this writ petition on behalf of the Association. One Mr. Raghavan Nair was an employee of the 2nd respondent-Calicut Wynad Motor Service (Pvt.) Ltd. He was dismissed from service by the employer for the alleged misconduct of receiving fares from 15 passengers without issuing tickets. The employee had denied the charges. An enquiry was conducted and pursuant to the same the services of the employee was terminated.2. At that time an industrial dispute between the management and its workmen were pending before the Industrial Tribunal, Calicut, as Industrial Dispute No. 31 of 1972. Therefore, the management moved the Industrial Tribunal, Calicut for approval of the action taken against the employee, which approval was granted from 21-10-1974, from which date the dismissal took effect,3. The employee as well as the petitioner-union of which he is a member raised an industrial dispute relati...
N.M. Velayudhan Vs. P. Sukumari
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-21-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ1209
ORDERKumari P. Janaki Amma, J.1. The petitioner is the respondent in M. C. 27 of 1970 of the District Magistrate's Court, Kottayam. That case was initiated by his wife, respondent herein for maintenance for herself and her two children. Maintenance was allowed at the rate of Rs. 30/- for the respondent and Rupees 15/- each for the two children. While the above petition was pending, the present petitioner filed H. M. A. No. 91/71 before the Sub Court, Kottayam for restitution of conjugal rights against the present respondent. That petition was allowed on 30-1-74. Thereafter the present petitioner filed C.M.P. 134/74 contending that the wife was not entitled to get maintenance from the husband and seeking cancellation of the order for maintenance already made. The petition was opposed by the present respondent. The Chief Judicial Magistrate dismissed his petition stating that the order for restitution of conjugal rights was not a ground for cancellation of the order for maintenance passe...
Collector of Customs and Central Excise and ors. Vs. P.A. Aboobacker
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-20-1977
Reported in: 1986(25)ELT160(Ker)
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. The learned Judge quashed Ex. P 3 order of the Collector of Customs & Central Excise and Ex. P-4 order passed on appeal by the Central Board of Excise and Customs confirming the said order. The writ petitioner Respondent was charged under Section 111(d) of the Customs act read with Section 3(2) of the Imports' and Exports (Control) Act, and for the imposition of penalty, under Section 112 of the Customs Act, for being, concerned in dealing with goods liable to confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act. The case against the appellant, briefly stated, was that on 23-3-1966, a party of Customs Officers searched the premises of M/s. M.R. Prabhu & Sons and seized 17 bags of cloves weighing 8,82,550 Kgs. The said cloves were cloves sold by the writ petitioner-respondents to M/s. Prabhu & Sons which the petitioner himself claimed to have purchased on 18-3-1966 from one Shah Prekaji Devichand, Bangalore. At the search on 28-3-1966, 75 bags of nux vomica we...
P. Pushpakaran Vs. Coir Board and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-19-1977
Reported in: (1979)ILLJ139Ker
V. Khalid, J.1. In this writ petition I am called upon to decide the question whether the transfer of the petitioner by the Coir Board was in the exigencies of service or was for other reasons. The task is none too pleasant. I tried ray best to persuade the counsel for the Coir Board to arrive at a satisfactory adjustment so that I could dispose of the writ petition without considering the rival contentions on merits. I wanted a concensual order if possible in view of the fact that the petitioner had continued at Ernakulam till now in spite of the transfer order dated 31-3-1975 and since the ground urged for Ext. P3 transfer is no longer available. The transfer was necessitated as a clerk in the Bombay Office went on leave for 45 days. She has now joined duty. Therefore, the need to fill up the vacancy and the administrative reason urged in support of Ext. P3 no longer exist. However, the counsel for the Coir Board was not amenable to this suggestion. His apprehension was that the canc...
State of Kerala and ors. Vs. C.M. Sebastian
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-16-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Ker155
Gopalan Nambiyar, C. J. 1. We regret our inability to agree with the learned Judge who allowed the writ petition of the 1st respondent and held that Under Ext, P-l document the provision Was categoric that the seigniorage fee is leviable at the rates mentioned and not at something to be estimated de hors the provisions of the document. The learned Judge pronounced that the writ petitioner was entitled to issue of a transport permit and that the value to be realised for timber was only at the rate of Rs. 3/- (sic Rs. 4/-?) per candy and that on the petitioner paying the same in accordance with the conditions in Ext. P-l the respondent would issue the transport permit to, the petitioner ex-peditiously and without delay. The State of Kerala and the Chief Conservator of Forests, and the Divisional Forest Officer, Nenmara have come up in appeal.2. The controversy hinges round the construction of a term in Ext. P-l lease, executed by and between His Highness the Maharaja of Cochin and one Ge...
Pazhekottal Nabeessu Vs. Pazhekottal Kunhamina and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-13-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Ker143
Gopalan Nambiyar C.J. 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises out of the order of the Sub Judge, Tellicherry, refusing to set aside an ex parte decree. The only ground on which the application to set aside the ex parte decree was dismissed was that I A. No. 391 of 1975 filed to excuse delay in filing the application had been dismissed. The revision-petition is preferred against the order on the I. A.; and Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, against the order rejecting the application to set aside the ex parte decree. The Civil Revision Petition has not been admitted, but wag directed to be posted along with the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. We think it unnecessary to deal separately with the C. R. P., as the grounds which led to the rejection of the application to excuse delay can well be heard as part of the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against the order refusing to set aside the ex parte decree. We accordingly dismiss the Civil Revision Petition.2. Dealing therefore with the Civil Miscellaneou...
C.C. Transport Co. Ltd. Vs. Industrial Tribunal and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-13-1977
Reported in: (1978)IILLJ278Ker
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. The learned Judge against whose judgment this appeal has been preferred, dismissed the writ petition to quash Ext. p6 Award of the Industrial Tribunal, Calicut. The dispute referred for adjudication was termination of service of one P. K. Sreenivasan, checking inspector from 30-8-1971. The appellant before us under whom the writ petitioner was employed was a Fleet owner who owned 32 stage carriages. By Ext. P1 notice it gave notice of termination of eight out of seventeen checking inspectors. That notice set out that it was issued as the financial condition of the company needed certain economy measures (vide Annexure to Ext. P1). This was repeated in the individual notices issued to the workmen (vide Ext. P2). In pursuance of the notices thus issued, eight of the juniormost workmen were retrenched. Seven of them have accepted the notices and the compensation offered, and allowed the matter to rest. P. K. Sreenivasan alone in respect of whom the Industrial...
Kuttappa Kurup Vs. Sreedharan Unni and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-09-1977
Reported in: AIR1979Ker50
Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J.1. The case has been referred to a Pall Beach at it was felt that the Division Bench ruling in Soolapani Variyar v. Padmavathy Amma (1966 Ker LR 512) contained certain observations which may require re-consideration.2. The question arises on a petition filed by way of objection to the report of the receiver in connection with an application under Section 15 of the Agriculturists Debt Relief Act for settlement of debts. The objection filed by Revision Petitioner, a usufructuary mort-gagee from the debtor, was that he cannot immediately be dispossessed, nor possession taken from him, and that the properties subject to the usufructuary mortgage, taken possession of by the receiver should be restored to him. The court below dismissed the application.3. Section 15 of Act 11 of 1970 provides for applications by persons unable to pay their debts. Section 15 (3) lists the particulars to be contained in the application. Clauses (d) and (e) of the same which are particularl...
Govindan Nadar Sreedharan Vs. Retna Bai Pushpa Bai
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-08-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ1213
ORDERKumari P. Janaki Amma, J.1. In this petition filed under Section 482, Cri. P. C., the petitioner seeks the setting aside of the order for maintenance passed against him in M. C. 35 of 1975 of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Neyyattinkara which has been confirmed in revision by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Trivandrum.2. The petitioner and the respondent belong to the Nadar community. The petitioner is a Hindu by birth while the respondent professes Christianity. The finding of the trial court is that there was a ceremony of marriage according to the custom of the community when the petitioner tied a thali round the neck of the respondent and presented a cloth to her. After the ceremony, the petitioner and the respondent went to the Sub-Registrar's office and executed Ext. P1, a marriage udampady. They lived together as husband and wife and a child was born to them. Thereafter, a rift took place. The petitioner, according to the respondent, began to ill-treat her and...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »