Kerala Court October 1982 Judgments
M.P. Varghese and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Ker133
U.L. Bhat, J.1. Petitioners in these original petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wanted to start new colleges in various places in the State during the academic year 1981-82. They submitted applications to the University of Kerala seeking affiliation for the academic year 1981-82. Syndicate of the University scrutinised the applications, conducted local enquiries through Commission, and after eliminating a few of the applicants, prepared a list of applicants, including the petitioners in these original petitions, and forwarded the listed applications to the State Government; that was because the Syndicate was required to ascertain the views of the State Government before deciding on the grant of affiliation. In all these original petitions it has been averred that what the Syndicate did was to 'recommend' approval to the Government and what the Government did was to 'approve' recommendation in regard to only a few colleges. The Government forwarded a list o...
Tag this Judgment!S. Abubaker Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-1982
Reported in: [1986]59CompCas267(Ker)
Balagangadharan Nair, J.1. The appeal is by the plaintiff in a suit for money due under two policies of life insurance taken out by his deceased father, which has been dismissed by the trial court.2. The plaintiff's father, Sultan Pillai, died on May 18, 1972. The first of the policies taken by him is represented by the proposal, Ext. B-1, dated December 23, 1970, for Rs. 10,000 and the second by the proposal, Ext. B-3, dated June 8, 1971, for Rs. 5,000. On Sultan Pillai's death, the plaintiff, who is the nominee and assignee of the policies, made a claim for the insurance amounts before the defendant, the Life Insurance Corporation of India (' the Corporation ') As the Corporation did not pay the amounts, the plaintiff brought a suit in 1974 asking for a decree for Rs. 15,000. In defence, the Corporation contended that Sultan Pillai, the assured, had obtained the policies by practising fraud. The fraud consisted in deliberately understating his age by 7 years and in suppressing inform...
Tag this Judgment!Sudarsan Chits (India) Ltd. Vs. Sukumaran Pillai and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-08-1982
Reported in: [1985]57CompCas85(Ker)
Subramonian Poti, Actg. C.J.1. In these three appeals, the Sudarsan Chits (India) Limited, a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, is the appellant. The appeals arise out of a common order of winding up passed in Company Petitions No. 9/81, No. 8/81, No. 49/81, respectively. These petitions are by the creditors of the company and are petitions under Section 439 of the Companies Act, read with Sections 433 and 434 of the Act for winding up on the ground that the company was unable to pay its debts. The petitioner in Company Petition No. 9/81 claimed a sum of Rs. 41,500 in Chit No. 76 of the Salem branch of the appellant company, the petitioner in Company Petition No. 8/81 claimed a sum of Rs. 77,000 as due in Chit No. 66 of the Salem branch and the petitioner in Company Petition No. 49/81 claimed a sum of Rs. 32,500 as due in Chit No. 39 of 1981 of the Salem branch. There were a series of similar petitions from other personsSeeking the same relief before the Company Judge s...
Tag this Judgment!Food Inspector, Chalakudy Municipality and anr. Vs. Prabhakaran and or ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-08-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ81
Subramonian Poti, Ag. C.J.1. Cri. R.P. 96 of 1980 came up in the first instance before T. Chandrasekhara Menon, J. who referred it to a Division Bench and the Division Bench referred the matter to the Full Bench since a question of law of considerable importance touching the interpretation of Rule 9-A of the prevention of Food Adulteration Rules is said to arise in the revision. The same question arises in Crl. Appeal No. 284 of 1979, which came up originally before Kader, J., and on reference by the learned Judge the Division Bench took Up the matter. That too was referred to a Full Bench by the Division Bench. In that case a further question arises, namely, the interpretation of Sub-section (7) of Section 10 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Ad, 1954. It was argued before the Division Bench that in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Shah Ashu Jaiwant v. State of Maharashtra : 1975CriLJ1868 such a question arose for consideration. The questions that we have to deci...
Tag this Judgment!Umayammal Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-1982
Reported in: (1983)ILLJ267Ker
Chandrasekara Menon, J.1. In these cases, provisional or temporary employees working in Government Departments, Government Companies, Statutory Corporations and Local Bodies question the action of the respective authorities concerned taken for terminating their services. Many of them were appointed being sponsored by the Employment Exchange and engaged invariably for varying periods of short duration. The foremost contention raised in these proceedings is that these employees are all governed by the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947- the Act, for short. Discharge of the persons or refusal to continue their employment after the stipulated period, according to the petitioners amounts to retrenchment under the Act. The petitioners take up the position that such retrenchment, even in respect of posts under the Government has to conform to the requirements under the Act - provisions under Chapter V-A of the Statute.2. A question will certainly arise in the case of Government employees and certa...
Tag this Judgment!Uthaman and ors. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ74
P. Subramonian Poti, Ag. C.J.1. This petition to enlarge the petitioners on bail pending disposal of the appeal before this Court has been referred by a Division Bench of this Court for hearing by Full Bench as the Division Bench doubled the correctness of the decision in Raian v. State of Kerala 1981 Ker LT 285 : 1981 Cri LJ NOC 206. The petitioners have been convicted by the Sessions Judge, Trichur in Sessions Case No. 77 of 1981. The petitioners 1 and 2 have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and the 3rd petitioner has been convicted under Section 448 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months. The 3rd petitioner has been granted bail by order dated 4-3-1982, and therefore we are concerned only with the motion for bail by petitioners 1 and 2. The petitioners were on, bail during the trial. It is the case of the petitioners that the right on be enlarged on bail should ...
Tag this Judgment!M.K. Santhamma Vs. the Kerala Public Service Commission and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-05-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Ker84
ORDERM.P. Menon, J.1. The petitioner was one of the applicants for selection to the post of staff Nurse, and was ranked as number 467 in the ranked list brought into force by the Public Service Commission, with effect from 20-12-1980. There was however some doubt about the entry in her S. S. L. C., book relating to community, and the commission referred the matter to the Commissioner for Government Examinations, for verification. The Commissioner issued a notice to the petitioner. She admitted that the relevant column was, originally blank and that she herself had filled it up by inserting the word 'Ezhava'. But the Commissioner found, after due enquiry, that the entry was correct, though unauthorised. A duplicate S. S. L. C. book was therefore issued and the Commissioner held that no further action was necessary.2. But the Public Service Commission thought that the making of the unauthorised entry amounted to tampering with the S. S. L. C. book, even if the entry was not false. Rule 2...
Tag this Judgment!Xavier and anr. Vs. Antony
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-04-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Ker21
George Vadakkel, J. 1. This is an appeal by defendants 3 and 5 against the decree allowing their eviction from their dwelling house and the site thereof having an extent of 31/2 cents and situate, at the time the suit was filed on 25-6-1964, within the Mattancherry Municipal limits, and now, within the bounds of the Cochin Corporation. The question raised is whether the 1st defendant, their father was a kudikidappukaran in respect of this house and on his death, defendants 3 and 5, are kudikidappukars thereof. The lower Courts answered the above question in 'he negative. The reason therefor is; at the time the suit was filed the 1st defendant had 5 cents of land fit for erecting a homestead within the Mattancherry Municipal limits, though after the institution of the suit, in 1966 he sold the said property and since, then he had no other land fit for erecting a homestead, nor have defendants 3 and 5 any other land.2. Defendants 3 and 5 contend that they are Kudikidappukars falling with...
Tag this Judgment!Transport Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. the New India Assurance Co. Lt ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-04-1982
Reported in: II(1984)ACC135
R. Bhaskaran, J.1. The suit is for recovery of amounts alleged to have been due to the plaintiff as compensation for damage caused to the goods insured by the 1st plaintiff and transported by the defendant. The particular of the claims are detailed in paragraph 3 of the plaint under the heads A to L. The first plaintiff is a Corporation doing General Insurance business; 2nd plaintiff a firm doing business at Mannar; and the defendant is a Private Limited Company doing the business of common Carriers.2. The facts of the case put in a nut-shell are: the defendant transported goods to Mannar under various lorry receipt numbers; the consignments were booked by the Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Ltd.. for and on behalf of the 2nd plaintiff; the consignments reached Manner in a damaged condition; the 2nd plaintiff took open delivery after paying the freights; the local agent of the defendant issued a damage certificate wherein it was admitted that the packages were in damaged condition, con...
Tag this Judgment!Khadija and anr. Vs. P.K. Mohammed P. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-01-1982
Reported in: [1985]58CompCas543(Ker)
K. Sukumaran, J. 1. Plaintiffs in O.S. No. 71 of 1971, before the Sub-Court, Cochin, are the appellants in the second appeal. Defendants Nos. 1 and 3 and the legal representatives of the deceased second defendant who had been impleaded as additional respondents Nos. 4 to 9 in the court below, are the respondents. The first defendant is the company known by the name and style of 'P.K. Mohammed (P.) Ltd.' Defendant No. 3 is a director of the company. Till his death the second defendant too was its director. Though the contentions between the parties originally ranged over a larger area, the arguments in the second appeal mainly relate to two questions : (i) the effect of the sale on September 13, 1956, of the ninety shares then held by. P.K. Mohammed, in auction in favour of the second defendant and the impact of Exts. A-1, and A-2 on those shares, and (ii) the claim relating to thirty-three shares originally held by P.O. Kamaludin, husband of the first plaintiff and father of the second...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›