Kerala Court September 1992 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.
Lakshmanan Vs. Bhaskaran
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-24-1992
Reported in: 2(1993)ACC290
Thulasidas, J.1. By award dated 31.10.1988 in O.P. (M.V.) No. 384 of the 1987 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode, the Tribunal, the 1st respondent, granted a sum of Rs. 3,34,300/- with interest at 10% as compensation to the heirs of Vijayan who was killed in an accident. Out of the compensation, Rs. 50,000/- was directed to be paid to Mathu, the mother of the deceased. She died on 17.7.1990. She had executed a Will in favour of the petitioner bequeathing the entire amount awarded to her by the first respondent. On the strength of the Will he applied for a cheque for a sum of Rs. 63,750/- inclusive of principal and interest. But, the first respondent held that it has no jurisdiction to pronounce upon the validity or otherwise of the Will and accordingly rejected the petition by the impugned order stating that the petitioner Will be at liberty to apply for cheque, after he obtained probate of the W will from a competent Court. The order is under challenge in this Original ...
Patalintavida Lakshmanan Vs. M.A.C.T. Kozhikode and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-24-1992
Reported in: I(1993)ACC64
B.M. Tulasidas, J.1. BY award dated 31.10.1988 in O.P. (M.V.) No. 384 of 1987 of the M.A.C.T. Kozhikode, the Tribunal, the 1st respondent, granted a sum of Rs. 3,34,300/ with interest @ 10% as compensation to the heirs of Vijayan who was killed in an accident. Out of the compensation, Rs. 50,000/- was directed to be paid to Mathu, the mother of the deceased. She died on 17.7.1990. She had executed a will in favour of the petitioner bequeathing the entire amount awarded to her by the first respondent.On the strength of the will he applied for a cheque for a sum of Rs. 63,750/- inclusive of principal and interest. But, the first respondent held that it has no jurisdiction to pronounce upon the validity or otherwise of the will and accordingly rejected the petition by the impugned order stating that the petitioner will be at liberty to apply for cheque, after he obtained probate of the will from a competent court. The order is under challenge in this Original Petition.2. Heard.3. Petition...
T.N. Jayarajan Vs. Jayarajan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-16-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)ALT(Cri)147; [1995]82CompCas629(Ker)
M.M. Pareed Pillay, J.1. The appellant's father filed a complaint against the respondent alleging an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complaint was filed on April 25, 1990. The Magistrate took cognizance of the offence. The appellant's father died on August 11, 1990. The appellant filed an application for permission to prosecute the complaint. The Magistrate dismissed the application and acquitted the accused. The order of the Magistrate is challenged by the appellant.2. The learned Magistrate held that in the absence of the complainant the only course open to the court is to dismiss the complaint and acquit the accused.3. The question that arises for consideration is whether the complainant's son is entitled to prosecute the complaint after the complainant's death.4. Under Section 256(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the Magistrate may adjourn the hearing of the case to some other day in the absence of the complainant. The section provides...
Bhaskaran Asan Vs. K. Ammukutty Amma
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-04-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Ker144
Balasubramanyan, J.1. Thetenant of a non-residential building within the meaning of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, hereinafter called the Act, is the petitioner in this Civil Revision Petition. The landlord, the respondent herein, filed an application, R.C.P. 25 of 1986 on the file of the Rent Control Court, Trivandrum for eviction of the petitioner under Section 11(2) and Section 11(4)(iv) of the Act. Claim under Section 11(4)(iv) of the Act was found against by the Rent Controller and was not pursued by the landlord before the Appellate Authority. We are therefore not concerned with that claim in this Civil Revision Petition.2. The landlord sought eviction of the petitioner under Section 11(2) of the Act on the allegation that the rent was in arrears from July 1984 at the rate of Rs. 35/- per month and that in spite of issuance of notice Ext. A1 under the proviso to Section 11(2)(b) of the Act, the tenant has not paid the rent and that therefore the landlord is en...
Prabhakaran Vs. Excise Circle Inspector
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-04-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ3599
K.T. Thomas, J.1. Four learned Judges of this Court, while sitting single on different occasions, have spoken in different terms on a common subject - whether an order framing charge in a criminal case is an interlocutory order or not. All the four learned Judges have, to Bolster up their respective points of view, relied on the Supreme Court decision in V. C. Sukla v. State, AIR 1980 SC 962: (1980 Cri LJ 690). It was Janki Amma, J. who first said in Jayaprakash v. State, 1981 KIT 100 ; (1981 Cri LJ 460) that framing charge is only an interlocutory order and hence no revision under Section 397(2) of the Criminal P.C., 1973 (for short 'the Code') would lie. Learned single Judge quoted from the decision in V. C. Sukla's case in support thereof. But, Chandrasekhara Menon, J. in Abdullakutty Haji v. Additional Judicial Ist Class Magistrate, 1982 KLT 861, dissented from Janki Amma, J. and took the view that a revision is entertainable as the order framing charge is not an interlocutory orde...
Union Bank of India Vs. M.P. Sreedharan Kartha and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-03-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Ker285
1. This appeal by Union Bank of India the plaintiff in O.S. No. 3 of 1982 on the file of the Sub Court, Ernakulam is directed against that part of the judgment and decree by which the court below while granting a decree as prayed for against the assets of the deceased principal debtor (deceased 1st defendant in the suit) in the hands of his legal representatives, defendants 4 to 12, negatived the claim against the sureties-defendants 3 to 5 and defendants 13 to 22 the legal representatives of another deceased surety, who are respectively respondents 1 to 3 and 13 to 20 in this appeal.2. Briefly the relevant facts are thus: Deceased 1st defendant was running a Vaidyasala, for the expansion of which the plaintiff sanctioned a loan with a limit of Rs. 11,500/ - under the scheme titled 'Loan to self employed'. The loan was repayable with interest at the stipulated rate in 33 equal installments. Under the loan so sanctioned the deceased 1st defendant received Rs. 5,000/-executing Ext. A1 de...
Sapna Jacob, Minor Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-02-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Ker75
ORDERK.G. Balakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner seeks to quash Ext.P13 report and Ext.P20 memo and to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction to the first respondent to keep one seat for admission to Medical/ Agricultural Courses, 1992-93 in the Scheduled Caste quota.2. The original Petition has been filed by Sapna Jacob, a minor girl represented by her mother, who claims to be a member of the Scheduled Caste being a Hindu by religion and Pulaya by caste. Petitioner contends that her mother belongs to Pulaya caste and Hindu religion. Her mother while working as Telephone operator in the Indian Posts and Telegraphi Department got acquainted with an employee in the same Department who belonged to Christian religion and they got married on 18-11-1973. Petitioner Sapna Jacob and younger brother Jijo Jacob were born in that wedlock. According to the petitioner even after the marriage of the petitioner's mother she continued to be a member of the Hindu religion and...
Govt. of Kerala Vs. Thulaseedharan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-02-1992
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ179Ker
Jagannadha Rao, C.J.1. These three appeals are by the State of Kerala and are directed against the common judgment of the learned single Judge in Writ Petitions O.P. Nos. 1827 of 1991, 6393 of 1988, 5294 of 1988 and other cases dated August 16, 1991 [1991 (2) KLT 683]. All the cases raise questions relating to claims made under the Dying-in-Harness Scheme of the Government of Kerala providing 'Employment Assistance' to the relatives and dependants of Government servants. The scheme has its origin in an executive order, G.O. M.S. No. 20/70/PD dated January 21, 1970 and had been periodically amended over the years and replaced by orders consolidating the amendments. The last of such orders whose interpretation falls for consideration in these cases are G.O.(P) 64/86 GAD dated February 28, 1986 and G.O. (P) No. 34/87/P and ARD dated December 17, 1987 (Ext.P9). In fact, the last part of clause 34 in Ext. P9 i.e., G.O. (P) No. 34/87/P & ARD dated December 17, 1987, which is applicable to th...
Mangal Singh Bhatti Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-02-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ3070
M. Jagannadha Rao, C.J.1. This Writ Appeal is preferred against the judgment of the learned single Judge dismissing the Writ Petition by judgment dated 16-7-1992 in O.P. No. 8863 of 1992-E.2. The appellant-writ petitioner is a Regulating Petty Officer (Air Crew Diver) of INS, Venduruthy, Southern Naval Command. He had 15 years of service, and opted for voluntary retirement. He was to be relieved on 28-3-1992 at Bombay, and before going to Bombay he was to be relieved from his unit on 28-3-1992. But in respect of an incident which took place on 29-2-1992, he was taken into custody on 30-3-1992 by the naval authorities. Thereafter his wife filed a habeas corpus application, O.P. No. 4550 of 1992, to get him released from the custody of the naval authorities. The said Writ Petition was finally heard by a Division Bench of this Court and was disposed of by judgment dated 24-4-1992. While refusing to issue a writ of habeas corpus, the learned Judges directed the naval authorities' to comple...
Kochupennu Ambujakshi and ors. Vs. Veluthakunju Vasu Channar and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-01-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Ker62
ORDERK.P. Balanaraana Marar, J.1. Can a direction be given to the police to assist a person to enjoy possession of his property What are the circumstances in which the extraordinary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution can be invoked in order to protect the life and property of a person? Should policemen be entrusted with a duty to decide rights of possession, easement rights and other civil rights These questions loom large in this O.P, seeking police protection. The matter has to be looked at in some detail since quite a large number of original petitions are filed seeking similar reliefs.2. Petitioners together own and possess two plots of land admeasuring 1 acre and 41.5 cents lying contiguous. Respondents 1 to 4 are their neighbours. When they attempted to cut open a new pathway through the property of petitioners, a suit was filed as O.S. 158/1989 before the Munsiffs Court, Haripad and obtained a decree for permanent injunction. Even thereafter respondents 1 to 4 with the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›