Kerala Court February 1988 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.
Jacob Thomas Simon and anr. Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs and anr ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-23-1988
Reported in: 1988(17)ECC344; 1988(35)ELT334(Ker)
ORDERChettur Sankaran Nair, J.1. This is a petition Under Section 482 of the code to quash the charges framed in C.C. 65/85, on the file of Additionai Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Ernakulam.2. Petitioner and three others, are alieged to have exported 5.9118 kgs. of Heroin under the guise that it was canned crab meat and canned shrimps. Offences alleged are Under Sections 7 and 38 of the Dangerous Drugs Act, 1936, Section 135 of the Customs Act 1982 and Sections 120B, 420, 465 and 477A I.P.C. value of the commodity exported is approximately. Rs. 25 lakhs. Consigner was named T.P.Moideenkutty, Panicker's Road, Calicut, a fictitions character. Customs Authorities at Manchester examined the cargo of 192 cans of what was described as crab meat and shrimp on landing, analysed and found it to be Heroin. U.K. Customs Authorities sent photostat copies of airways bill etc. to Cochin Customs. P.Ws 1 and 2, Assistant Collector and Investigating Officer were examined, and Exts. P1...
Chakki Vs. Ayyappan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-22-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Ker89
Sivaraman Nair, J.1. The mother of a minor child aged about six years now appeals the decision of the District Court, Manjeri in O.P. (Guardians and Wards) No. 21 of 1983. The trial Court found that the father was the natural guardian under Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (for short 'the Act'). He also found that by reason of her conversion, the mother had disentitled herself to act as natural guardian under the proviso to that section. The appellant submits that the child was illegitimate and therefore, the mother was the natural guardian. She also contends that in spite of her conversion out of Hinduism, she is entitled to act as the natural guardian for the welfare of the child. These contentions naturally throw up a complex of serious questions. They are :(a) Whether there was a valid marriage according to Hindu Law modified by custom between the appellant and the respondent? (b) Whether the minor child was illegitimate? and (c) Whether the welfare of the child...
Chief Secretary and ors. Vs. Mathai Kuriakose and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-19-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Ker113
1. If this second appeal is illustrative of the general pattern of the conduct of litigation relating to forest areas, it should cause much anxiety and concern for all connected with conservation of the forests obligated by the Constitutional scheme. The facts speak for themselves.2. The State has filed this second appeal. It arises out of a suit for injunction in which it and its officials were defendants. The respondents-plaintiffs, three in number, are encroachers in about six acres of forest area, quite close to a timber depot of the Forest Department. There suit for injunction restraining the State Government and its officials from acting against them has been decreed by the Courts below. The State Government has therefore come up in second appeal.3. The suit was filed with a specific allegation that the area encroached upon was revenue puramboke and not reserve forest area. Encroachment was equated with possession; and possession should be protected by courts. That appears to be ...
N. Ramachandran Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-18-1988
Reported in: (1988)68CTR(Ker)136; [1988]170ITR447(Ker)
T. Kochu Thommen , J.1. By the impugned order, exhibit P-7, the first respondent, the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, in exercise of his discretion under Sub-section (2A) of Section 18 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, as it then stood, waived the penalty levied under Section 18(1)(a) in respect of the assessment year 1972-73, but only reduced the penalty in respect of the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75. In respect of the last two years, the reduction was by Rs. 30,000 and Rs. 25,000, respectively. The reason stated by the Commissioner for this differential treatment was that for the assessment year 1972-73, for which penalty was wholly waived, the petitioner filed returns within 10 months after the due date and, therefore, there was no inordinate or unconscionable delay. For the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75, the delay was 64 months and 52 months, respectively. What apparently weighed with the Commissioner in the exercise of his discretion by waiver in respect of one year and redu...
V. Velayudhan Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-17-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Ker38; [1988]64CompCas52(Ker)
ORDERK.T. Thomas, J.1. What is the position of a guarantor (or even a surety) vis-a-vis the creditor -- has he any obligation in a fiduciary capacity to account to the creditor? If he has, he is not entitled to advance a plea of 'no means', when the decree-holder takes out execution proceedings for his arrest and detention. The petitioner is one of the judgment-debtors. The Court below spurned down his plea that he has no means to pay the decree debt on the reasoning that he, being the guarantor, is in a fiduciary capacity to account to the decree-holder.2. The State Bank of India ('the bank' for short) advanced a loan to one Krishnan on a guarantee given by the petitioner for the due repayment of the loan. The bank filed a suit and obtained a decree against Krishnan as well as the petitioner. Krishnan died in themeanwhile and the bank proceeded against the petitioner in execution. The decree-holder prayed for issuance of a warrant of arrest against the petitioner. It was resisted by t...
Kathiyammakutty Umma Vs. Thalakkadath Kattil Karappan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-15-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Ker133
ORDERK.T. Thomas, J. 1. The judgment-debtor died during execution proceedings of a decree for injunction. When his legal representatives were sought to be brought on record, they resisted contending, inter alia, that the decree for injunction is not binding on them since it is only a personal decree as against the original judgment-debtor. The objections were overruled by the execution court. This revision is in challenge of the order. 2. Facts : The first respondent obtained a decree the will be referred to as the plaintiff, for covenience) restraining the sole defendant from obstructing the plaintiff 'in erecting a fence on the western boundary of the plaint schedule property and from interfering with plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property'. The appellate court confirmed the decree. Decree-holder was obliged to resort to execution proceedings since the defendant was not inclined to keep away when the decree-holder tried to put up the fence. The defendant, a...
Executive Engineer, T.C. Division, K.S.E. Board, Palghat Vs. J.H. Shar ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-15-1988
Reported in: AIR1988Ker285
Bhat, J.1. The first respondent herein obtained a money decree against the second respondent in O.S. 390 of 1981 of the Sub Court, Trivandrum on the basis of a compromise. At the instance of the decree-holder attachment before judgment was effected of certain sum of money said to be belonging to the judgment-debtor in the hands of the appellant herein, executive Engineer of the K.S.E. Board. The decree-holder subsequently filed execution petition under Order XXI, Rule 46A, C.P.C. He filed E.A. 566/84 seeking direction to the appellant to remit the amount in Court. The application was opposed by the appellant, but was allowed by the executing court. Hence this appeal.2. In the Court below appellant contended, inter alia that the amount in his hands is the security amount deposited by the judgment-debtor, that the judgment-debtor abandoned contract and thereby the Board sustained huge loss, final liability has not been fixed and on a proper computation the Board would owe no money to the...
P. Karunakaran Vs. Chief Commercial Superintendent, Southern Railway a ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-11-1988
Reported in: (1989)ILLJ8Ker
V.S. Malimath, C.J.1. This appeal is against the judgment of the learned single Judge dismissing O.P. No. 6195 of 1987. The appellant claims to be the Vice-President of the Vegetarian Refreshment Room Workers' Union, Railway Station, Kottayam. His case is that the 3rd respondent was running a vegetarian refreshment room at the Kottayam Railway Station from 1986 as a person who has been given the licence to conduct such vegetarian refreshment room in Railway Station, Kottayam, subject to certain terms. The 3rd respondent-contractor who had acquired the right to run the vegetarian refreshment room at Kottayam Railway Station had, according to the appellant, employed about 30 workers. It is his casethat all the 30 persons were employed as contract labourers to work in that refreshment room. It is stated that they were not employed by the Railways. They were employed by the contractor and were working under the contractor. The licence under which the 3rd respondent was operating the afores...
Vincent and ors. Vs. Aisumma
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Ker81
ORDERK.T. Thomas, J.1. This revision is by the defendants whose application for an order of mandatory injunction was dismissed by the trial Court. Learned counsel for the respondent -- plaintiff raised a preliminary objection that the application for revision cannot be entertained in view of the hurdle contained in Section 115(2) of the Civil P.C. for short 'the Code'), since an appeal lies against the impugned order.2. Facts are the following : In a suit filed by the plaintiff for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from entering upon the plains schedule property, an application for a temporary injunction was also filed. The temporary injunction was to restrain the defendants from trespassing upon the plaint schedule property or from cutting open a pathway through the said property. The trial Court granted an ex parte interim injunction order. When the defendants entered appearance and tiled objections, the Court vacated the ex parte order and dismissed the application for...
Poikathusseri Ksherolopadaka Sahakarna Sangham Ltd. and anr. Vs. Dy. L ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-1988
Reported in: (1988)IILLJ231Ker
P.C. Balakrishna Menon, J.1. This original petition on behalf of a cooperative society is to quash exhibit P-l order of the 1st respondent, the appellate authority under the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Shops Act') directing reinstatement of the 2nd respondent, dismissed from the service of the society, with backwages.2. The 2nd respondent was the secretary of the society. He was dismissed from the service of the society with effect from 1st July, 1985 for the misconduct, alleged in the show cause notice served on him. The committee of the society on perusal of the books of account and records of the society was satisfied that the 2nd respondent was guilty of misconduct and on that finding a punishment of dismissal from service was imposed on him. The appellate authority under the Shops Act has held that the society is not entitled to adduce evidence in justification of the punishment imposed on the workman for the reason that the misc...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »