Kerala Court March 1983 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.
Abraham Vs. Director of Telecommunications and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-11-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1372
P. Subramonian Poti, Actg. C.J.1. This is a petition by the petitioner in O. P. 9243 of 1982. for taking action for contempt against respondents 1 to 3 they being the Director of Telecommunications, Trivandrum. the Divisional Engineer, Telephones, Trivandrum, and the Junior Engineer, Telephones, Kozthancherry. The basis for making this application is that the order of this Curt in C. M. P. 2165 of 1983 in O. P. 9243 of 1982 directing reconnection of the telephone (33 of the Kozhancherry Exchange) forthwith was not respected by the respondents. After going through the averments in the petition we did not find a case made out against respondents 1 and 2 and therefore we confined notice to the 3rd respondent in the petition.2. He has appeared before us to-day. The order of this Court in C. M. P. 2165 of 1983 was passed on 28-1-1983. The petition for stay had been posted on several dates earlier and when it was finally heard on 15-12-1982 it is said to have been represented by Central Gove...
M.J. George Vs. S.i. of Police
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-08-1983
Reported in: 1984CriLJ717
ORDERU.L. Bhat. J.1. The complainant in Crl. M. P. No. 2360 of 1982 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the Second Class No. II Trichur, who filed the complaint against Sub-Inspector of Police. Anthicad Police Station alleging offences under Sections 379 and 384. IPC. being aggrieved by the order of the Magistrate dismissing the complaint for want of sanction under Section 197 of the Criminal P. C. has filed this criminal revision petition.2. There can be no doubt that Sub-Inspector of Police is a public servant within the meaning of Section 21 IPC. The question is whether a complaint against a Sub-Inspector of police would fall within Sub-section (1) of Section 197 of the Criminal P. C. in which case alone sanction of the State Government will be necessary for any prosecution. The learned Magistrate took the view that Section 197(1) will apply in the case of prosecution of a Sub-Inspector of police and this view is contested by the revision petitioner.3. The main part of Sub-sec...
Kollam Taluk Abkari Contractors' Association Vs. Quilon Chethu Thozhil ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-07-1983
Reported in: (1983)IILLJ369Ker
Bhaskaran, J.1. This writ petition by Kollam Taluk Abkari Contractors' Association is directed mainly against respondents 1 to 4 associations representing toddy workers. Respondents 5 and 6 are respectively the Deputy Labour Officer, Quilon and the State of Kerala. The prayer in the writ petition is for a declaration that the members of the petitioner-association are not bound to pay any retrenchment compensation to the employees attached to the different toddy shops who are the members of the respondents' Unions, as long as they are not factually retrenched. There is also a prayer for a declaration that Sections 25F and 25FF of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, are not applicable to the employees of the various toddy shops of the members of the petitioner-association as long as they continue to be attached to the respective toddy shops. There are other incidental reliefs also stated in the writ petition.2. The Kerala Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund Act, 1969 (the Act) came into force on ...
P.S. Gopal Raja Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-04-1983
Reported in: (1983)37CTR(Ker)261; [1985]155ITR434(Ker)
S.K. Kader, J. 1. The petitioner, who owns 9.02 acres of land said to have been mostly planted with cardamom at Udumbanchola village, seeks to quash the second part of Ex, P-1 notice issued to him under Section 18 of the Agrl. I.T. Act, 1950, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', by the Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax Officer, the first respondent herein. The petitioner claims to have filed a return in accordance with the provisions of the Act in respect of income received by him from the properties owned by him for the years 1977-78, 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81. The assessing authority did not accept the returns in the absence of accounts and other supporting evidence. Ex. P-1 notice states that the petitioner has purchased 2.50 acres and 2.34 acres of cardamom estate in the name of his minor sons, P.G. Subbaraju and P.J. Prabhu Ram, respectively, and that the source of income for purchasing these properties in the name of his minor sons has not been proved. Therefore, the asse...
Narayanan Kutty Vs. State
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-02-1983
Reported in: 1984CriLJ58
P. Subramonian Poti, Actg. C.J.1. We have been regularly receiving petitions from prisoners in the various jails in the State sometimes through the grievance boxes maintained in the jails and sometimes direct. The six petitions with which we are dealing here are petitions so received from the prisoners in the various jails in the State. The questions raised in these petitions are same and therefore we have chosen to take up these cases and dispose of them by a common judgment. The questions concern the claim for premature release of the prisoners undergoing sentence of imprisonment in the jails in Kerala State on the strength of advice of the Advisory Board constituted by the State under the Kerala Prison Rules. If the Advisory Board so constituted in the State advises the State Government to release prisoners prematurely taking due account of the fact that they have under gone substantial terms of punishment and their conduct and other circumstances entitle them to seek premature rele...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›