Kerala Court January 1995 Judgments
W.H.D'Cruz and Sons Vs. M.E. Thomas and Anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-31-1995
Reported in: [1995(71)FLR398]; (1996)ILLJ706Ker
V.V. Kamat, J.1. The limitations on this court exercising extraordinary and supervisory powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India in the matter of an award of the Central Government Labour Court, Ernakulam, acting on a reference of the Government of India, relating to the justifiability of the action of the petitioner's management as regards retrenchment and/or termination, are well known and established. However, the court is made aware of the limitations set down by the decisions cited.2. Under Article 226, the decision of the subordinate tribunal can only be annulled, whereas under Article 227 appropriately further directions can be issued by the High Court (see Workmen of Nellikkai Estate v. Superintendent, Nettikkai Estate (1959-II-LLJ-751) (Ker)). Jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is not different and superintendence - both judicial and administrative - does not widen. The powers are to be exercised most sparingly and only i...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. V.K. Sarala Vs. CochIn Devaswom Board
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-24-1995
Reported in: (1995)IILLJ1160Ker
Thulasidas, J1. Heard 2. Petitioner's father, late E.K.Sankaran Namboodiri, was a Santhikaran of Kulapuramangalam Temple, under the first respondent - Cochin Devaswom Board. His appointment was made as per the provisions of Ext. R 1 scheme formulated pursuant to the decision of the Supreme Court in writ petition Nos. 14117 - 18 of 1984. He died in harness on July 23, 1989 leaving his wife and daughter as heirs. She made an application for appointment under the dying in harness scheme, which was rejected by the first respondent by Ext. P 3 order dated November 25, 1989, stating that her claim for appointment under the scheme is 'inadmissible'. She also made another representation to the first respondent, which was also rejected by Ext. P4, on the ground that she is not eligible for appointment under the scheme, in the wake of which this Original Petition is filed, after the first respondent was served with a Lawyer Notice.3. It is not in dispute that the first respondent has adopted all...
Tag this Judgment!Premchand R. and anr. Vs. State of Kerala Represented by Chief Secreta ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-19-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Ker276
ORDER1. Petitioners in this original petition seek for a declaration from this Court that the proposed commencement of an evening LL.B. Course of three year duration by the Cochin University of Science and Technology, the 2nd respondent herein is patently illegal and violative of the provisions of the Advocates Act and also contrary to the provisions of the Cochin University of Science and Technology Act. Petitioners also pray for issuance of a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents from admitting any student to the aforesaid classes without getting permission in writing of the Bar Council of India, the 4th respondent and the 5th respondent, Bar Council of Kerala. Petitioners further seek consequential reliefs also.2. The first petitioner is a final year student of law in the Government Law College, Ernakulam and 2nd petitioner is an advocate practising in this Court. According to them, they are interested in maintaining a high standard of legal studies in the country and the prev...
Tag this Judgment!Regional Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs. K.P. Gopi ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-16-1995
Reported in: [1995(71)FLR268]; (1995)IILLJ235Ker
Thomas, J.1. The question involved in this appeal is whether the employment injury sustained by a workman had resulted in permanent total disablement? As the question was decided in the affirmative by the Employees Insurance Court (for shot the Insurance Court) this appeal is filed by the concerned Regional Director of the E.S.I. Corporation.2. The workman concerned was doing weaving work in a coir factory run by a co-operative society. He had a fall on July 30, 1985 and sustained injury to his back bone. He was treated in the Medical College Hospital for a certain period. When he renamed for work he was found not fit to do the same work, but his request for assignment of lighter work was not granted by the society. He approached the E.S.I. Corporation and it was accepted as a case of 'employment injury' and then he was referred to the Medical Board for assessing his disability. The Medical Board examined him and assessed his loss of earning capacity as 20%. The workman preferred an ap...
Tag this Judgment!Pankajakshy Amma and ors. Vs. Custodian of Vested Forest and Conservat ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Ker225
Shanmugam, J. 1. The question that arises for consideration is whether and if so to what extent the provisions of Order XLVII, C.P.C. would apply to review petition filed before the Forest Tribunal under Section 8B of the Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971, hereinafter called as 'the Act', or before the High Court under Section 8C of the Act. The appellants herein filed an application O.A. No. 851 of 1974, before the Forest Tribunal, Palghat, claiming exemption/exclusion for an extent of 7.22 acres of land situated in Nochipully, Palghat taluk and District, from vesting in the Government under the said Act. The Forest Tribunal passed an order dated 28th May, 1977 upholding the claim and allowed that application. The respondents herein filed a review petition, LA. No. 370 of 1987, under Section 8B of the Act. The Tribunal allowed the review petition and set aside the order passed in O.A. No. 851 of 1974 holding that the appellants are not entitled to the claim made by th...
Tag this Judgment!Penta Properties and P.V. Mohanan Vs. Official Liquidator and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: [1997]88CompCas178(Ker)
B.N. Patnaik, J.1. The Travancore Ogale Glass ., Always, as one of its secured creditors, was permitted by the company court, by order dated February 11, 1985, in C.A. No. 291 of 1984, to file a suit against the company. The suit (O.S. No. 3 of 1986) was filed before the Subordinate Judge's Court, Ernakulam. By the decree dated January 30, 1988, the bank was made entitled to realise a sum of Rs. 1,48,22,388.73 with future interest at the rate of 10 per cent. per annum from January 2, 1986, and costs were quantified at Rs. 8,11,188.25. Thereafter, the bank filed an execution petition (E.P. No. 275 of 1990) in the Sub-Court, Ernakulam. Notice was issued to the official liquidator and the company in the execution proceedings. But, the official liquidator did not file any objections. The case was posted on April 11, 1990, July 25, 1990, and November 24, 1990, awaiting objections from the official liquidator. Since no objection was filed, the execution court on November 24, 1990, directed t...
Tag this Judgment!A.O. Thomas Vs. T.K. Ramesan and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: (1995)IILLJ997Ker
B.N. Patnaik, J.1. Both the appeals, having arisen out of the same judgment in O.P. No. 6720 of 1990 dated July 11, 1994 were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The petitioner in the O.P. (hereinafter called 'the committee') is the appellant in W.A. No. 1398 of 1994 and the second respondent in the O.P. (hereinafter called 'the aggrieved employee') is the appellant in W.A. No. 1300 of 1994.2. The original petition was filed challenging the order of the appellate authority under Section 18(2) of the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1960 (for short, the Act) who held that the termination of the services of the aggrieved employee by the committee was without any reasonable cause and was made in violation of the provisions of Section 18(1) of the Act. The committee was directed to reinstate the employee in its service as Lift Operator-cum-watchman with continuity of service and full back wages and in default, to pay the employee Rs. 28,000/- as...
Tag this Judgment!Asian Techs Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax and Another.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: (1995)125CTR(Ker)438; [1995]213ITR378(Ker)
B. N. PATNAIK J. - The petitioner, while challenging exhibit P-6 order dated September 30, 1991, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin - second respondent -in R.P. No. 203/89-90/L, prays for a declaration that the petitioner-company is entitled to interest under section 244(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the excess amount adjusted from advance tax paid by the petitioner and treated as tax paid pursuant to the order of assessment and became refundable to the petitioner consequent to the appellate orders.The petitioner is a company and is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961. For the assessment year 1979-80, the assessee paid a total sum of Rs. 4,55,781 prior to the order of assessment as advance tax and tax deducted at source, on March 15, 1979, and March 24, 1979. By the original assessment order dated September 22, 1982, total tax payable was assessed at Rs. 9,24,800. The entire balance amount of tax was also paid. On appeal, the tax liability was reduced to Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!'Niyamavedi' rep/by Its Member K. Nandini Vs. Ramon Srivastava, I.P.S. ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1976
K. Sreedharan, J.1. 'Niyamavedi', claiming itself to be a public spirited organisation consisting of lawyers, represented by one of its members Miss. K. Nandini, Advocate, moved this Court by filing O. P. 17367 of 1994 inter-alia praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 4th respondent, the Director of Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi, to arrest first respondent -Raman Srivastava, I. P. S., Inspector General of Police, Southern Zone, Kerala State - for his alleged involvement in the I.S.R.O. espionage case. Petitioner also prayed for directing the State Government to place Sri. Raman Srivastava under suspension with immediate effect.2. On the basis of the reports in the newspapers-Indian Express and Mathrubhoomi-petitioner contended that first respondent by utilising his official power had involved in the I.S.R.O. espionage case. According to the paper reports, Director of Central Bureau of Investigation and Joint Director of Intelligence Bureau interrogate...
Tag this Judgment!Ali Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: 1995(1)ALT(Cri)449; 1995CriLJ2974
K.P. Balanarayana Marar, J.1. The accused in Sessions Case 80 of 1991 before Second Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Ernakulam is the appellant. He was convicted under Section 20(b)(i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (Act for short) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 11/i years. The prosecution case is that the accused was found possessing 7.6 grams of ganja for purpose of sale near Naval Base Ernakulam Gate at about 5 p.m. on 7-5-1991. The Sub Inspector of Police, Harbour Police Station found 7 small packets of ganja. The accused had no valid permit or licence to possess the article. The article was recovered from his possession and he was arrested. The accused and the contraband article were taken to the Police Station and crime was registered under Section 20(b)(i) of the Act. After trial the Assistant Sessions Judge found the accused guilty of the offence charged against him convicted him and awarded the sentence referred above....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »