Kerala Court June 1985 Judgments
Govinda Menon Vs. Varkey and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-27-1985
Reported in: AIR1985Ker277
Bhaskaran, C.J.1. Two important questions of law arise in this appeal: (1) If, in proceedings pending on the date of commencement of the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1969 (Act 35 of 1969) (hereinafter referred to as the Amending Act), which amended the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1964 (Act I of 1964) (hereinafter referred to as the Principal Act), a tenant dispossessed of his holding in execution of a decree for arrears of rent, had claimed restoration of possession thereof, under Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Kerala Stay of Eviction Proceedings Act, 1967 (Act IX of 1967) (hereinafter referred to as the Temporary Act), whether the application for that relief is to be pursued under the provisions of that Act or under the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1964, as amended by Act 35 of 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the Amended Act); and (2) whether for the purpose of Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Temporary Act, a deposit accompanying an application under Secti...
Tag this Judgment!Gangadharan Vs. Kochappi Chellappan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-25-1985
Reported in: 1985CriLJ1517
ORDERS. Padmanabhan, J.1. Supported by an affidavit, the revision petitioner filed Cri. M. P. 3149/84 on 8-8-1984 before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Neyyattinkara. Allegation in the petition was that the respondents (1st respondent herein and his son) committed theft of some items of furniture from his furniture shop and have hidden them at their residence. Petition was filed under Section 94 of the Criminal P.C. Prayer was to issue an order for search. Date of commission of offence was alleged to be on 7-8-1984. On 8-8-1984 itself, the Magistrate ordered : 'issue search warrant'. On 16-8-84, pursuant to the search warrant, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Balaramapuram conducted search in the residence of the 1st respondent. 13 items of furniture were taken to custody. A search list was prepared. Both the petitioner and the 1st respondent claimed custody. After taking some evidence, the Magistrate ordered entrustment of the articles to the petitioner. First respondent file...
Tag this Judgment!Kallara Sukumaran Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-24-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Ker122
1. The writ appeal is directed against the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court dismissing in limine a writ petition filed by the petitioners.2. The 3rd respondent was, and respondents 4 to 6 are, Ministers in the State of Kerala. They belong to the 'Kerala Congress', one of the constituents of the 'ruling front' which has formed the Ministry. Kerala Congress had a patty convention at Ernakulam on the 25th of May, 1985. These respondents participated and spoke in that meeting. The appellants-petitioners alleged that the 3rd respondent in his speech, aggressively exhorted for a 'Punjab model' agitation, directed against the Central Government. According to them, that speech was the result of an 'anti-centre' conspiracy hatched by many including respondents 4 to 6. Respondents 4 to 6 even encouraged the 3rd respondent in his speech, and had stood by him even subsequent to his resignation from the Ministry. The speech undermines the sovereignty and integrity of the Indian Unio...
Tag this Judgment!Food Inspector, Tellicherry Municipality Vs. P. Abdulla Haji
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-24-1985
Reported in: 1986CriLJ1
S. Padmanabhan, J.1. Complainant is the appellant. Appeal is by special leave against the order of acquittal in a Food Adulteration case. Complainant is the Food Inspector, Tellicherry. Complaint was filed against the respondent, a grocery dealer in Tellicherry Municipal Town, for having sold edible common salt on 28-9-1979 which was found by Ext.P. 13 report of the Public Analyst to be adulterated. The Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tellicherry who tried the case as S.T. 167 of 1979 found the respondent not guilty and acquitted him.2. According to the standards prescribed by the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, the standards for edible common salt relevant for our purpose are: (1) moisture contents should not exceed 6 per cent and (2) sodium chloride contents should not be below 96 per cent. Ext.P. 13 showed that moisture was 12.4 per cent and sodium chloride content was only 85.25 per cent.3. The finding which resulted is the acquittal are:(1) Rule 7(3) of the Prevention of F...
Tag this Judgment!P.K. Krishnan Nair and ors. Vs. K. Karukaran Nair and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-24-1985
Reported in: 2(1986)ACC183
U.L. Bhat, J.1. M.F.A. 69 of 1979 is filed by the owner and driver and M.F.A. 76 of 1979 is filed by the insurer of a bus bearing registration No. KLE 8071, challenging the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam awarding a sum of Rs. 41,500/- as compensation together with interest at 6 per cent from the date of award and costs to the claimants, father, mother and grandmother of N.K Radhakrishnan Nair who died in a motor vehicle accident on 4-2-1976 at Thripunithura.2. When Radhakrishnan Nair was riding a cycle from east to west along the public road near Thripunithura on the afternoon of 4-2-1976, the bus proceeding from east to west hit the cycle from behind as a result of which Radhakrishnan Nair was thrown out and he was dragged on for about 10 yards, with the cycle, along the road and thereafter front wheel of the bus ran over him. At that time, Radhakrishnan Nair was drawing monthly salary of Rs. 150/- under PW 3 and had prospects of going to West Asia for employm...
Tag this Judgment!S. Velu Pillai and anr. Vs. Kochappi Sreenivasan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-24-1985
Reported in: 1(1986)ACC240
K. Bhaskaran, C.J.1. This is appeal is under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and Rule 32 of the Kerala Accidents Claims Tribunal Rules, 1977, and is directed against the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Trivandrum dated 24.11.78 in OP. No. 23 of 1977. The appellants are the parents of one Rejana, a five year old promising girl who happened to be run over by car KLQ 4569, driven by the first respondent.2. Exhs. A-4 and A-5, wound certificate and postmortem certificate, and also the independent evidence of the occurrence witnesses PW 2 and PW 3, would go to show that the death of Rejana was due to accident involving KLQ 4569. It is in evidence that the car was proceeding along the wrong side and was driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner. The Tribunal having found that the death was due to accident involving KLQ 4569, due to the rash and negligent act by the first respondent proceeded to fix the compensation in the light of the evidenc...
Tag this Judgment!S. Velu Pillal and ors. Vs. Kochappi Sreenivasan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-24-1985
Reported in: 2(1985)ACC415
K. Bhaskaran, C.J.1. This appeal is Under Section 110(C) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 and Rule 32 of the Kerala Accidents claims Tribunal Rules, 1977, and is directed against the judgment of the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Trivandrum dated 24-11-1978 in O.P. No. 23 of 1977. The appellants are the parents of one Rejana, a five year old promising girl who happened to be run over by Car KLQ 4569, driven by the first respondent.2. Exts. A4 and A5, wound certificate and postmortem certificate, and also the independent evidence of the occurrence witnesses PWs 2 and 3, would go to show that the death of Rejana was due to accident involving KLQ 4569. It is in evidence that the car was proceeding along the wrong side, and was driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner. The Tribunal having found that the death was due to accident involving KLQ 4569, due to the rash and negligent act by the first respondent proceeded to fix the compensation in the light of the evidence o...
Tag this Judgment!Elayadath Madhavan Vs. the Asstt. Custodian and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-19-1985
Reported in: AIR1985Ker226
ORDERU.L. Bhat, J.1. First respondent is the Assistant Custodian, Office of the Custodian of Evacuee Property and the second respondent is the Government of Kerala. Petitioner herein filed O. A. 908 of 1976 against the respondents in the Land Tribunal, Tellicherry under Section 72B of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act') contending that he is the tenant of the property mentioned therein under the first respondent and seeking assignment of the right, title and interest of the landlord which has vested in the Government under Section 72 of the Act. The application was opposed by the respondents on the ground that the lease under which thepetitioner claims falls within the exemption in Section 3(1) of the Act and therefore no provision in Chap. II (including Section 72) of the Act would apply to the lease or to the petitioner. This contention has been accepted by the Tribunal as well as the Appellate Authority and the application for purchase has been dismissed. These o...
Tag this Judgment!Food Inspector, Alwaye Municipality Vs. A.V.S. Das
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-19-1985
Reported in: 1985CriLJ1617
S. Padmanabhan, J.1. This Appeal by special leave was filed by the Food Inspector, who was the complainant in S.T. 14 of 1980 tried and disposed of by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Alwaye, acquitting the accused-respondent.2. The complaint was for an offence punishable under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The allegation is that the respondent exposed for sale adulterated deshi (cooking) butter. For deshi butter, according to the standards prescribed, there must be minimum 76 per cent milk fat. Ext. PI 1 report of the Public Analyst, on the basis of which the complaint was filed, showed that the sample contained only 70.2 per cent milk fat. Deficiency in milk fat alone is the item of adulteration. On the application of the respondent, one of the samples kept with the Local (Health) Authority was sent to the Central Food Laboratory and Ext. P14 report is to the effect that it contained only 70.9 per cent of milk fat. E...
Tag this Judgment!Govindan Sukumaran and ors. Vs. Narayani Kunjulakshmi and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-17-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Ker54
K.S. Paripoornan, J. 1. Defendants 1 to 4, 7 to 10, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 22 to 24, 31 to 37 in O.S. No. 32 of 1976, Subordinate Judge's Court, Attingal, are the appellants. Plaintiffs 1 to 9 and defendants 11, 15, 16, 18,20,21, 25 to 30, 35 to 40 and defendants 5 and 6 are the respondents, The suit was filed for declaration of plaintiffs' title and possession over the plaint schedule property and for an injunction. The plaintiffs claimed the right under Ext. A1 (same as Ext. B1) Will executed by one Velayudhan dated 27-3-1099. By the said document Velayudhan bequeathed 32 items of properties. They were his self acquired properties. He bequeathed properties to parties 1 to 6 (seshakars), parties 7 to 14, distant kindred and party No. 15, a person who brought him up. Parties 1 and 2 were seshakars. Party No. 3 is a seshakari (niece) and parties 4, 5 and 6 are the children of party No. 3. Parties 5 and 6 are daughters of party No. 3 and party No. 4 is Narayanan Govindan, the son of party N...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »