Kerala Court October 1983 Judgments
M. Chacko Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-28-1983
Reported in: 1985CriLJ120
ORDERU.L. Bhat, J.1. The Sub Inspector of Chathannoor Police Station registered a case as Crime No. 14 of 1982 against the petitioner and 16 others for offences Under Sections 143, 144, 188, 427, 447 and 506. IPC, read with Section 149, IPC, and after investigation, laid the final report and the court in due course took cognizance in regard to all the offences and issued process. It is to quash the proceedings that one of the accused has filed this petition Under Section 482, Cr.P.C, (for short the 'Code').2. Obviously, there was a dispute regarding an alleged pathway between the petitioner and others. It appears the Revenue Divisional Officer (Obviously the Executive Magistrate) Quilon issued an order on 6-2-1982 to maintain the pathway. The final report states that all the accused violated the order and distroyed the pathway. The final report proceeds to state that the accused trespassed into the land of CW. 1, destroyed the fence and the compound wall of CW. 1, levelled that portion...
Tag this Judgment!K.V. Mathew Vs. District Manager, Telephones, Ernakulam and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-18-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Ker40
ORDERV. Bhaskaran Nambiar, J.1. The petitioner, a Proprietor of a Cinema theatre, applied for a telephone connection and deposited a sum of Rupees 1000/- for the purpose. He claimed preference under Non-OYT special category and it was rejected by order dated 13-10-1980 (Ext. P-7) on the ground that Cinema Talkies/Theatres are nut eligible for special category. The petitioner seeks to quash Ext. P-3 and pray for consequential reliefs.2. Executive instructions have been issued by the Postal Department from time to time regarding allotment of telephones under the OYT, Special and General categories.3. Under OYT (Own- your Telephone)scheme, an applicant'makes an advance lump sum payment in the form of advance payment of part of the rent for certain number of years. The subscriber gets a rebate and is liable to pay less rent than the normal rent fixed by the Department.'4. Under Non-OYT scheme,'an applicant makes an advance deposit, the amount depending upon capacity of the exchange. When a...
Tag this Judgment!Parameswaran Nair Narayanan Nair Vs. Krishnapillai Chellappan Pillai
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Ker48
ORDERK.K. Narendran, J.1. The respondent-tenant in a petition for eviction under Section 11 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 2 of 1965, for short the Act, is the petitioner in the civil revision. The petition for eviction was filed by the respondent herein. The building belongs to his son and the nephew. According to the respondent, as per the sale deed (Ext. A8) the has the right to collect the rent and of residence in the building. The petitioner-tenant in his objections filed to the petition for eviction raised a contention that the respondent cannot file the petition for eviction without the previous written consent of the landlord and the recitals in the sale deed will not amount to such a written consent and will not empower him to file the petition for eviction.2. The Rent Control Court found that the authorisation in Ext. A-8 can be treated as a consent insisted by Section 11 (16) of Act 2 of 1965 and hence, even in the absence of Ext. A-7, the respondent c...
Tag this Judgment!Kunhabdulla Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-12-1983
Reported in: (1984)ILLJ118Ker
Bhaskaran, A.C.J.1. The petitioner who was an Assistant Station Master at Ambur Railway Station of the Madras Division, Southern Railway, Madras, headed by the 4th respondent, the General Manager, Southern Railway, Madras, was ordered to be removed from service by Ext. P. 13 penalty advice dated 26th August, 1982 issued by the 2nd' respondent, the Divisional Operating Superintendent, Southern Railway, Madras. The writ petition is for the quashing of Ext. P. 13 and for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with all attendant benefits.2. The petitioner was appointed to the post of Assistant Station Master, on completion of his training, by the 4th respondent by his order dated 2nd January, 1964, a true copy of which is Ext. P. 1; the petitioner was, during the material time, the elected Secretary (Finance) of the All India Station Masters' Association, Southern Zone; an extract of Article 3 of the Constitution dealing with the ob...
Tag this Judgment!Kerala Wakf Board and anr. Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-10-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Ker57
T. Kochu Thommen, J.1. The 1st petitioner is the Kerala Wakf Board (the 'Board') and the 2nd petitioner is its Chairman, They challenging Ext. P21 order dated 29-8-1983 whereby the Board was superseded by the Govt. in purported exercise of its power under Section 64(1) of the Wakf Act, 1954 (the 'Act') with effect from the date of publication of the notification in the Official Gazette. operative part of Ext. P21 reads :'For the foregoing reasons the State Government is of opinion that the Board has persistently violated the duties imposed upon it and persistently abused its powers to the detriment of the Wakf Board. Therefore it is deemed necessary in the public interest and to protect the interest of the Board (Trust) to supersede the present members of the Board. Hence the Government in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 64(1) of the Wakf Act, 1954 do hereby supersede the Board with effect from the date of publication of this Notification in the Official Gazette ...
Tag this Judgment!T.M. Abraham and anr. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-05-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Ker42
ORDERP.C. Balakrishna Menon, J.1. This original petition filed by the 1st petitioner is to quash the proceedings of respondents 1 and 2 the State of Kerala and the Superintending Engineer, Public Health Circle, Cochin, awarding a contract to the 3rd respondent for the work referred to as 'the Industrial Water Supply Scheme to Ambalamugal Construction of Overhead Water Tank and Treatment Plant and Allied Works at Choondy', and also to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to award the contract to the 1st petitioner or in the alternative to issue a direction to make a proper choice of the person for the award of the contract in the interest of the State and in public interest. The 2nd petitioner got himself impleaded later as per orders of this Court dated 30-8-1983 in C. M. P. No. 22232 of 1983.2. Both the petitioners are Contractors registered as A class with the Public Health Engineering Department of the. Government of Kerala. For the construction of an overh...
Tag this Judgment!ibrahimkutty and anr. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-05-1983
Reported in: 1984CriLJ221
M. Fathima Beevi, J.1. The appellants, accused 1 and 2 in Sessions Case No. 35 of 1980 on the file of the Court of Session, Thodupuzha, have, in this appeal, challenged their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34, I. P.C. and sentence to imprisonment for life by judgment dated 17-11-1981, on the charge that the accused in furtherance of their common intention committed murder by causing the death of one Basheer by cutting him with a chopper and stabbing him with a knife at about 7.45 p. m. on 5-3-1980 at the tea-shop of P. W. 2 at Upputhara in the high ranges, 32 kms. away from the Peermade Police Station.2. Accused 1 and 2 are brothers. The deceased Baslheer is the son-in-law of P. W. 1. There had been ill-feeling between Basheer and the 1st accused, and a few days prior to the date of occurrence, the deceased Basheer remonstrated with the 1st accused about the quarrels that he used to have with his wife to the annoyance of the neighbours. An altercation ensued between the...
Tag this Judgment!Superintendent of Customs Vs. Ummerkutty and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-05-1983
Reported in: 1986(23)ELT384(Ker)
U.L. Bhat, J.1. In Cri. M.P. Nos. 684 of 1983, 685 of 1983, 694 of 1983 and 695 of 1983, the petitioners therein, who are respondents 1 to 7 herein, were granted conditional bail by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tellichcrry, overruling the objections raised by the Superintendent of Customs, Customs Intelligence Unit, Cochin. The latter has now filed this Cri. M.C. under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the 'Code') seeking cancellation of the interim bail as well as the regular bail ordered.2. The facts as can be gathered from the order of the lower court, the averments in the petition and submissions made at the Bar, can be summarised as follows : Customs Officers concerned received information to the effect that contraband articles (smuggled goods) were likely to be landed at the Tellicherry coast on the night of 15th September, 1983, or early hours of the morning of 16th September, 1983. They organised a customs party and kept the coast line under watch. T...
Tag this Judgment!The Superintendent of Customs, C.i.U. Vs. P.K. Ummerkutty and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-05-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1860
ORDERU.L. Bhat, J.1. In Crl. M. P. Nos. 684 of 1983, 685 of 1983, 694 of 1983 and 695 of 1983. the petitioners therein, who are respondents 1 to 7 herein, were granted conditional bail by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tellicherry overruling the objections raised by the Superintendent of Customs Intelligence Unit Cochin. The latter has now filed this Crl. M. C. under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for short the 'Code' seeking cancellation of the interim bail as well as the regular bail ordered.2. The facts as can be gathered from the order of the lower Court, the averments in the petition and the submissions made at the Bar, can be summarised as follows :- Customs Officers concerned received information to the effect that contraband articles (smuggled goods) were likey to be landed at the Tellicherry coast on the night of 15-9-1983 or early hours of the morning of 16-9-1983. They organised a customs party and kept the coast line under watch. They found Lorry K. L. N. ...
Tag this Judgment!Unni Vs. Vijayan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-03-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Ker32
ORDERK.K. Narendran, J.1. The short point that arises for consideration is whether under Order XXXVIII of the Code of Civil Procedure an attachment before judgment other than a conditional attachment under Sub-rule (3) of Rule 5 can be ordered without either directing the defendant to furnish security within a time fixed by the Court or directing him to appear and show cause why he should not furnish security The petitioner is the tenant of a building belonging to the respondent-landlord. A suit was filed by the respondent for arrears of rent against the petitioner. Along with the plaint the respondent moved for attachment before judgment of some immovable property of thepetitioner. An interim attachment ordered by the trial Court was later lifted by it on hearing both sides on the ground that there was no arrears of rent due from the petitioner. The respondent filed a civil miscellaneous appeal against the above order. The lower appellate Court set aside the order of the trial Court a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›