Kerala Court January 1981 Judgments
Kochunni Vs. Kuriakose
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-31-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ker87
K. Bhaskaran, J.1. The appellant is the defendant in a suit for recovery of plaint schedule item 1 with arrears of rent and future rent and for a permanent injunction to restrain the defendant from entering upon plaint schedule item 2, filed by the respondent-plaintiff.2. On 1-3-1962 plaint schedule item 1 consisting of 30 cents of land was taken by the appellant-defendant on an agreement to pay a monthly rent of Rs. 100/-for a period of three years for the purpose of installing a saw mill, and Ext. PI rent deed was executed by the defendant to evidence the transaction. In terms of Ext. PI. the defendant was to construct the necessary buildings to install the machinery for conducting the saw mil] and pay rent every month without default; in case of default, the appellant-defendant had to pay interest on the arrears of rent at 12% per annum and surrender the property, demolishing and removing the building on expiry of the period without dispute. It is averred in the plaint that the defe...
Tag this Judgment!Narayanan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-29-1981
Reported in: (1981)IILLJ354Ker
Subramonian Poti, Acting C.J.1. Our learned brother Kochu Thommen, J., referred this original petition for hearing by a Division Bench in view of conflicting decisions on the point agitated in the original petition. The decisions referred to are those in O.P. 2979 of 1976 and Mariakutty v. Municipal Commissioner (1975) S.L.R. 188.2. The controversy in the original petition concerns appointment to the post of Section Officer in the Legislature Secretariat in accordance with the Special Recruitment Scheme under Rule 17A of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules. It is said that two vacancies to be filled up by way of special recruitment of Section Officers from among Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were reported to the Public Service Commission. The petitioner is a member of the Scheduled Tribe, being a Mala Araya. He is a graduate. He applied for the post. In the rank list prepared by Public Service Commission the petitioner ranked as No. 2 in the list of Scheduled Tribes...
Tag this Judgment!K. Madhavan Nambiar Vs. Wealth-tax Officer, C-ward, Cannanore.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-28-1981
Reported in: [1982]134ITR695(Ker)
CHANDRASEKHARA MENON J. - In this writ petition, filed under art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings initiated against him as the karta of Kanakathidam family, a Marumakkattayam tarwad, for the alleged escaped assessment of wealth-tax within the meaning of s. 17 of the W.T. Act, 1957, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. He has been notified that the net wealth of the family chargeable to tax for the assessment year 1970-71 had escaped such assessment and, therefore, it was proposed to reassess the net wealth. A consequent request has been made to him to file a return of the net wealth chargeable to tax within 35 days of the receipt of the notice. This notice is sought to be quashed as also the attachments effected in the proceedings subsequently.The petitioners case is as follows: Kanakathidam tarwad was never an assessee to wealth-tax or income-tax. It had only a common dilapidated tarwad house and the jenmam rights in a few items of agricultural ...
Tag this Judgment!Maya Devi Vs. M.K. Krishna Bhattathiri and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-25-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Ker240
Viswanatha Iyer, J.1. This application to condone the delay in filing the appeal has been posted before us as the correctness of the decision in Padmavathi v. Kalu (1980 Ker LT 306) : (AIR 1980 Ker 173) was doubted when the application came up for consideration before one of us sitting single. The appeal in this case was filed on 24-9-1980. On that date the time to file the appeal was over. But no petition to excuse the delay was filed along with the appeal. The Registrar returned the memorandum of appeal and granted 15 days' time to cure the defects. This was on 25-9-1980. On 8-10-1980 the appeal was represented with the petition to excuse the delay. When the respondent entered appearance on receipt of notice of the delay petition he took up a preliminary objection that there is no valid presentation of the appeal or the petition to excuse delay in that the memorandum of appeal was not accompanied by the application to excuse the delay as provided for under Order 41, Rule 3A C.P.C. an...
Tag this Judgment!Mosa Rajayyan Vs. Jacob Haris
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Ker135
ORDERK. Bhaskaran, J. 1. This revision by the 3rd judgment-debtor (3rd defendant in the suit) is directed against the order dated 28-2-1980 passed in E. P. No. 233 of 3975 in O. S. No. 134 of 1964 on the file of the Munsiff, Neyyattmkara, which was an application for recovery of the plaint schedule property, the suit for redemption having been decreed as early as on 31-3-1967. 2. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the decree could not be executed inasmuch as it was not one passed in conformity with the provisions of Order XXXIV, Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for no preliminary decree was passed preceding the decree that was sought to be executed, as required under that rule. He pointed out that the decree was passed on 31-3-1967 at a time when Order XXXIV of the Code of Civil Procedure stood without being amended by the Kerala amendment to that Order (concerning suits relating to mortgage of immovable property) which was brought into effect by the amendment dated 10...
Tag this Judgment!Jayaprakash Vs. State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-22-1981
Reported in: 1981CriLJ460
ORDERP. Janaki Amma, J.1. The accused in Sessions Case No. 42 of 1980 of the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Trichur, are the petitioners. They were charge-sheeted by the prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 448, 323, 324 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The Judicial Magistrate of the Second Class, Trichur, committed the accused to stand their trial before the Court of Session. The learned Sessions Judge made over the case for trial by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Trichur. The accused appeared before that Court. After the appearance of the accused in Court the case was posted for preliminary hearing under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. After hearing the arguments on behalf of the accused and by the prosecutor the case was posted for orders on 18-11-1980. On 18-11-1980 the Court framed charges against all the accused for offences punishable under Sections 143, 148, 448 and 307 read with Section 149, I.P.C. No other form...
Tag this Judgment!Johnson Vs. General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-21-1981
Reported in: (1981)IILLJ118Ker
Balagangadharan Nair, J.1. The four petitioners were recruited as conductors in the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (K.S.R.T.C.) through the employment Exchange and appointed as Reserve Conductors at Trichur with effect from June 6, 1980. Subsequently they were reappointed for a period of 89 days. That period was, according to the petitioners, to expire on December 13, 1980, though according to the respondent, the District Transport Officer of the K.S.R.T.C. at Trichur, the term of appointment of petitioners 1 and 3 was to expire on December 11, 1980 and that of petitioners 2 and 4 on December 9, 1-80. However that be, before expiry of the term, the petitioners filed the Original Petition on November 28, 1980. On December 1, 1980, the Original Petition was admitted and an order of interim stay till December 17, 1980 was made on C. M. P. No. 18164 of 1980 which had been filed by the petitioners along with the Original Petition. The prayer in the CMP. was 'to stay all further ste...
Tag this Judgment!K.A. Lona Etc. Vs. Dada Haji Ibrahim Hilari and Co. and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-20-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Ker86
Bhat, J.1. These two appeals have been filed by the plaintiffs in O. S. No. 252/72 and O. S. No. 159/71 respectively on the file of the Sub Court, Trichur.2. A. S. No. 187/75 is filed by the plaintiff in O. S. No. 159/71. The suit is for recovery of monies due under two promissory notes dated 11-11-1967 for Rs. 10,000 (Ext. A1) and dated 17-12-1969 for Rs. 28,500/- (Ext. A2) said to have been executed by the 3rd defendant, managing partner of the first defendant firm, for and on behalf of the firm, the second defendant being the other partner. The amounts remained unpaid in spite of demands and a notice. The second defendant filed written statement contending that the firm has been dissolved, that the third defendant had no authority to borrow money so as to bind the firm, that the business was stopped on account of the unlawful acts of the third defendant, that documents in the suit are brought about by collusion of the plaintiff and the third defendant who are friends, that loan coul...
Tag this Judgment!Narayanan and ors. Vs. Krishnan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-20-1981
Reported in: 1981CriLJ563
ORDERU.L. Bhat, J.1. The six accused persons in C.C. No. 522 of 1977 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the II Class, Alathur, who have been convicted under Sections 143, 447, 427 and 434, I.P.C. read with Sections 149 L. P.C. and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25/- for each of the offences under Sections 143 and 447. I.P.C. and to pay a fine of Rs. 50/-for offence under Section 427 I. P. C, the conviction and sentence having been confirmed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palghat, in Crl. A, No. 18 of 1978, are the revision petitioners herein. No separate sentence was imposed under Section 434. I.P.C.2. The prosecution case may be summarised as follows: The de facto complainant (P. W. 1) is the owner in possession of properties comprised in R.S. No. 62 (A5) and (A6) and 64 (1) of Kan-nanoor village within the limits of Koyalmannam Panchayat, the same having been allotted to him under partition (Ext P. 1). A private cart-track belonging to P. W. 1 passes through this property. ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. K. Anantha Bhat Vs. K.M. Ganapathy Bhatta and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-14-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Ker102
P.C. Balakrishna Menon, J.1. The Ist defendant in O. S. No. 25 of 1969 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Kasaragod is the appellant in Second Appeal No. 1013 of 1976 and the plaintiff in O. S. No. 161 of1968, of the same Court is the appellant in S. A. No. 1015 of 1976. O. S. No. 161 of 1968 is for a permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from diverting the water of a natural stream into a well belonging to the 3rd defendant.2. The defence to the suit is one of denial of the plaintiff's right to the use of the water in the natural stream. The defendants also deny that they are diverting water from the natural stream into a well or tank in S. Y. No. 557/4.3. O. S. No. 25 of 1969, is by the 3rd defendant in O. S. No. 161 of 1968 and his son. They are the owners of the property in RS. No. 557/1 and RS, No. 557/4. The natural stream enters RS. 557/1 from the south and flows further north. It touches RS 557/4 belonging to the 1st plaintiff at the northwest portion of the property...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »