Kerala Court January 1990 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.
Union Bank of India Vs. K.V. Venugopalan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-11-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Ker223
ORDERK.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J.1. The Union Bank of India is the revision petitioner.2. Facts relevant and requisite to dispose of the issue arising for consideration lie in a narrow compass. The first respondent is the decree-holder and respondents 2 and 3 are the judgment-debtors in O.S. 522/81. The first respondent had obtained an attachment before judgment of the lorry belonging to the judgment-debtors. The attachment however, was raised on one E. V. John, the brother of the judgment-debtors, giving a fixed deposit receipt for a sum of Rs. 6,500/- issued by the petitioner-bank as security to the court. In execution of the decree the court, treating the bank as a garnishee, called upon the bank to deposit the amount and interest thereon, covered by the fixed deposit, in court. This order, directing the bank to deposit the amount, it is submitted on behalf of the decree-holder, was passed after rejecting the bank's contention that the bank has a 'lien' over the amount in fixed depos...
Priya Rubber Industries (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-11-1990
Reported in: [1990]182ITR433(Ker)
K.A. Nayar, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner wants to quash exhibits P-2, P-4 and P-5. On July 11, 1985, there was a search by the Central Excise Department and there was also a test production by the Central Excise Department on October 1, 1985. Thereafter the Central Excise Department imposed a duty of Rs. 52,79,885.08 and penalty of Rs. 12 lakhs. Aggrieved by the order of the Collector of Central Excise, the petitioner filed an appeal, viz., Appeal No. 111, . . . before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal and stay was granted on condition of payment of Rs. 3 lakhs. Exhibit P-2 dated August 17, 1989, is a notice issued to the petitioner in which it is stated that the income-tax assessments for the assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85 have been set aside by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) by his order dated September 28, 1987, with a direction that the materials available with the Excise Department may be brought on record and that the assessee...
T.K. Narayana Iyer and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-10-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Ker345
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. This is an appeal by the claimants in L.A.R. No. 114/1980. The land involved in this case is 5 1/2 cents in Sy. Nos. 110/4A and 110/5 of Guruvayur Village. Notification for the acquisition under Section 3(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was made on 9-3-1976. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs. 4,500/- per cent. The claimants were not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. They wanted the matter to be referred to a civil court. The matter was referred and numbered as L.A.R. No. 114/1980 of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Trichur.2. The acquisition was for widening the East Nada of Guruvayur Sreekrishna Temple and for providing amenities to Pilgrims. The claimants-appellants have claimed Rupees 8,000/- per cent. The court below enhanced the compensation amount by granting Rs. 6,000/- per cent for the land acquired. The claimants have filed this appeal claiming Rs. 8,000/- per cent.3. Guruvayur Sreekrishna Temple is one of the m...
Sundara Gownder Vs. Balachandran
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-09-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Ker324
M.M. Pareed Pillay, J. 1. Defendant is the appellant. Plaintiff filed the suit for realisation of Rs. 22,080/- and interest thereon on the strength of Ext. A1. The case of the plaintiff is that he an Abkari Contractor from 1973-74 onwards was not in a position to participate in the auction for 1977-78 on account of the statutory bar that a defaulter to the Toddy Welfare Fund is not eligible to participate in the auction and to circumvent it he reached an agreement with defendant that Shop Nos. 17, 19 and 20 out of the 28 shops bid by the defendant will be transferred to him with thepermission of the authorities and that he paid Rs. 22,080/- to the defendant on 1-3-1977 immediately after the auction and the defendant failed to perform his part of the agreement. Defence was total denial of the agreement. The learned Sub Judge decreed the suit finding that the plaintiff is entitled to the suit claim.2. Learned counsel for the appellant-defendant submitted that the Sub Judge was not justif...
Raman Madhavan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-09-1990
Reported in: (1991)IILLJ544Ker
Sukumaran, J.1. The appellant is aggrieved by the concurrent adverse decisions of the Courts below by which the suit had been dismissed as not maintainable. The view was taken on a preliminary issue after the parties had presented their pleadings and the Court had raised the issues.2. The skeletal facts necessary to consider the contention of the appellant may now be stated.3. The appellant had connections with abkari business. He was licensee of a toddy shop during the year 1974-75. Proceedings initiated under the Kerala Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') resulted in order casting a liability on him. According to the State and the statutory authorities dealing with Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund, he was an employer of the workmen in the toddy shop and as such bound to make the contributions as enjoined under the statutory scheme. The order has become final. The appellant had not challenged the order by resort to Article 226 of the Constitution. H...
K.B. Jacob and Sons, Stevedors, CochIn Vs. the Shipping Corporation of ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-08-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Ker256
P.K. Shamsuddin, J.1. Defendant is the appellant. Suit was for damages and short delivery of goods.2. Plaintiff is a Shipping Company engaged in the carriage of goods by sea. In its vessel s. s. Vishwa Raksha, it brought among other cargo, a consignment of steel sheets to the Port of Cochin for the Cochin Refineries Ltd. The vessel arrived at Cochin on 11-10-1967. The defendant was engaged as stevedores for discharge of the said cargo. Discharge operation was completed on 18-10-1967. There were 217 bundles of steel sheets for discharge. The mode of discharge was that each bundle would be tied to a wire sling, lifted from the hatch and discharged to the lighter moored by the side of the ship. For the above purpose, the wire sling with a circumference of 1 3/4' was used. In the course of discharge of the last bundle to the lighter the sling broke and the bundle fell into the lighter. As a result of the impact, the bottom of the lighter gave way and 22 bundles of steel sheets were irrecov...
K.V. Krishna Veni and ors. Vs. K.K. Rajagopal and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-08-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Ker337
P.K. Shamsuddin, J. 1. Appellants are defendants 1, 3 and 4 in O. S. No. 19 of 1978 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge of Kozhikode.2. The suit was filed for partition and separate allotment of the plaintiffs' share. Plaintiffs and defendants 1 to 6 are Thiyyas. Plaint B schedule property belonged to one Janaki, who is the grandmother of plaintiffs and defendants 1 to 6. Kamalakshi and Meenakshi are daughters of Janaki. Plaintiffs and defendants 5 and 6 are children of Kamalakshi. Defendants 1 to 4 are the children of Meenakshi. 7th defendant is an assignee of a portion of the plaint schedule property. On 7-1-1941, Janaki executed a will evidenced by Ext. A1 bequeathing A schedule property therein to Krishnan and Madhavan, who are her sons and Kousalya, who is the daughter of Meenakshi and B schedule property to Meenakshi and Kamalakshi. Kamalakshi pre-deceased Janaki leaving plaintiffs and defendants 5 and 6 and deceased Sikandar and Krishnakumar as legal heirs. Janaki died...
Official Liquidator and anr. Vs. K.S.E. Board and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-08-1990
Reported in: I(1990)ACC627; 1990ACJ421; [1990]67CompCas577(Ker); [1990(60)FLR879]; (1990)IILLJ321Ker
K. John Mathew, J.1. The official liquidator, who is the liquidator of Mittal Steel Re-rolling and Allied Industries Ltd. (in liquidation) is the 'first petitioner and the second petitioner is a watchman appointed by the liquidator in the said company. The respondents are the Kerala State Electricity Board and the Chief Engineer, K. S. E. B., Trivandrum. On January 1, 1989, at 12.45 p.m. the second petitioner suffered burns on various parts of his body due to electric shock from the stay wire of an electric post in the company's premises. He was taken to a local hospital first, and, thereafter, to the Medical College Hospital, Trichur. He was an inpatient in the Medical College Hospital up to February 14, 1989. Even though he is discharged, he has not fully recovered from his injuries and he is still under treatment. This application is to direct the Kerala State Electricity Board to pay compensation for the injuries to the second applicant.2. The injuries suffered by the second petiti...
K.B. Jacob and Sons Vs. the Shipping Corporation of India Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-08-1990
Reported in: I(1990)ACC397
P.K. Shamsuddin, J. 1. Defendant is the appellant Suit was for damages and short delivery of goods.2. Plaintiff is a shipping Company engaged in the carriage of goods by sea. In its vessel S.S. Vishwa Raksha, it brought among other cargo, a consignment of steel sheets to the Port of Cochin for the Cochin Refineries Limited. The vessel arrived at Cochin on 11-10-1967. The defendant was engaged as stevedores for discharge of the said cargo. Discharge operation was completed on 18-10-1967. There were 217 bundles of steel sheets for discharge. The mode of discharge was that each bundle would be tied to a wire sling, lifted from the hatch and discharge to the lighter moored by the side of the ship. For the above purpose, the wire sling with a circumstance of 13/4 was used. In the course of discharge of the last bundle to the lighter the sling broke and the bundle fell into lighter. As a result of the impact, the bottom of the lighter gave way and 22 bundles of steel sheets were irrecoverabl...
Marimuthu Kounder Vs. Radhakrishnan and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-05-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ker39; [1990]68CompCas658(Ker)
Varghese Kalliath, J.1. This is an appeal by the first defendant. The suit is on a promissory note. The promissory note is Ext.AI. It is dated 20-6-1975. The first defendant executed a promissory note, Ext.A2 on 15-12-1972 in favour of second defendant. The amount covered by Ext. A2 promissory note was Rs. 7,500/-. The second defendant endorsed this promissory note in favour of the plaintiff on 5-6-1973. Thereafter, the first defendant executed a promissory note in favour of the plaintiff showing the consideration of Ext. A2 and the interest on the amount advanced under Ext. A2 as the consideration for Ext.AI promissory note. Even after demand, the first defendant did not pay the amount. So, the plaintiff instituted the suit.2. The first defendant contended that he has not executed the promissory note. He also contended that there is no consideration for the promissory note. The only question that has to be decided is whether the promissory note is a genuine one or not. Otherwise, the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »