Kerala Court December 1995 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.
Jose John Vs. K.C. Kuruvila, Son of Chanda Pillai and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-12-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT(Cri)514; 1996CriLJ1449
ORDERN. Dhinakar, J.1. Petitioner in Crl. M. C. 1847 of 1995 and the petitioner in Crl. M. C. 2161 of 1995 respectively are the 4th and 1st counter-petitioners in C.M.P. No. 8 of 1995 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankari. The above said C.M.P. was filed before the learned Magistrate by the 1st respondent under Sections 195 and 340, Crl. P. C. against the petitioners and respondents 2 to 4. The said petition was filed with a prayer to initiate proceedings against the petitioners and respondents 2 to 4 for offences under Sections 193, 196, 211, 219, 220 and 120-B read with Sections 109, 34 and 500, I.P.C. The said petition is filed as annexure-II in the above Crl. M.Cs. The allegation in the said petition is that at the instance of the petitioner in Crl. M. C. 2161 of 1995, who was the then Asst. Supdt. of Police, Alappuzha, a false complaint was laid by the petitioner in Crl. M. C. 1847 of 1995 and respondents 3 and 4 were made to register a crime in Crime No. 1...
Aravind Ramakant Modawdekar and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors. Overruled
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-11-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Ker195
Thomas, Ag. C.J.1. When the Original Petitions were filed the initial target was the steep rise in the tax amount imposed by the Government on 'contract carriages'. But eventually petitioners restricted the scope of their challenge to the two tier tax rates fixed on contract carriages -- one for those operating service entirely within the State of Kerala and the other for those conducting service both within and outside the State. The former class of contract carriages is described as 'intra-State service' for convenience and the latter class as 'inter-State service'. The same expressions can appropriately be used by us also in this judgment. Tax in respect of intra-State service is Rs. 500/- per quarter per seat while for the other it is just double of it. This differentiation is attacked as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.2. Learned single Judge dismissed all the Original Petitions on the ground that the said classification has an intelligible basis and that there is a ne...
Samarudeen Vs. Assistant Director of Enforcement and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-09-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2825
ORDERD.J. Jagannadha Raju, J.1. This O. P. is filed by the petitioner who was formerly residing in Saudi Arabia at Daman. He prays for a writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent, the Assistant Director of Enforcement, Trivandrum, to conduct investigation, enquiry and such other proceedings for violations of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act committed by respondents 4 and 5, and for prosecuting them for the violations. He also prays for the consequential relief of recovering 95,000 Riyals which were illegally converted and brought to India through un-known source and ultimately came to be deposited in the bank account of the fifth respondent. He prays that adjudication proceedings and prosecution should be launched against respondents 4 and 5. He also prays for & direction to respondents 2 and 3, the Director General of Police, and the Circle Inspector of Police, to conduct investigation and complete it expeditiously and file a charge sheet before the concerned Magistrate on th...
Neela Productions, Sreekumar theatre, Trivandrum and ors. Vs. S. Kumar ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-08-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Ker239
ORDERK. Sreedharan, J.1. Plaintiffs in O.S. 378/94 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Ernakulam are the petitioners. They filed the suit on the averment that the plaint schedule films belong to the first plaintiff partnership firm which has the right of exhibition and exploitation of those cinematographic films. It is stated that first defendant who retired from partnership firm has no right to deal with the schedule films and he is unauthorisedly dealing with the films to the exclusion of the plaintiffs. Therefore, plaintiffs want to restrain the first defendant from dealing with any of the films scheduled to the plaint and defendants 2 to 4 from entering into any transaction with the first defendant regarding those films. It was also averred that 4th defendant is negotiating with the third defendant regarding the exhibition of one of the films. While defendants 1 to 3 are having a place of business outside the territorial limits of Subordinate Judge's Court, Ernakulam, the...
K. Sreedharan Vs. Thajudeen Koya and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-08-1995
Reported in: (1996)IILLJ249Ker
K.J. Joseph, J.1. The petitioner was an employee in the saw mill owned by the first respondent. On May 6, 1987, in the course of employment, he sustained injuries, as a result of which his right palm was cut off. Though it was got stitched, the five fingers of his right hand became paralysed. He, therefore, filed a claim petition before the third respondent under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short, the Act only). The Third respondent, as per Ext.P1 judgment awarded a compensation of Rs. 24.460/- with 6% interest per annum from June 6, 1987 and in case of failure to deposit the said amount in the court within 30 days from the date of receipt of intimation of the said judgment, revenue recovery steps were directed to be taken against the first respondent under Section 31 of the Act. Instead of complying with Ext.P1, he chose to execute two settlement deeds - Exts.P2 and P3 - in favour of his wife viz., the second respondent transferring the entire properties owned by him. Ac...
K.P. Sahadevan Vs. T.K. Sreedharan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-08-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ1223
K.P. Balanarayana Marar, J.1. Appeal against acquittal. The complainant in C. C. 241/89 before Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kannur is the appellant.2. The complaint was one under Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruements Act alleging commission of offence under Section 138 of the Act. The complainant is the President of the Kannur District Motor Engineering Metal Workers Union. The accused was the proprietor of T. K. Automobiles and General Engineering Service and two other concerns. His factory was closed with effect from 3-9-1987. In pursuance to conciliation proceedings initiated by District Labour Officer, Kannur the disputes between the management and the union were settled and a sum of Rs. 1,50,583/- was agreed to be paid to the workers. The amount was not paid as agreed. Since then a sum of Rs. 29,700/- was paid. Towards the balance a cheque for Rs. 1,17,000/- was issued which when presented in the bank was returned with the endorsement 'refer to the drawer'. Notice under p...
Some Employees of Hindustan Latex Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Ker193
ORDERP.A. Mohammed, J.1. The substance of this writ petition is an anonymous complaint brought in before the notice of this court against the management of M/ s. Hindustan Latex Limited, a Government of India Undertaking (for short 'the Company'). Normally if an anonymous complaint is received, it will find its place in cesspool. This court will always regard it with disdain. But in the present case, the complaint has obtained an honoured position since it has been numbered as letter O.P. by this court under Article 226 of the Constitution, obviously for certain reasons. It contains serious allegations against the management of the Company. It is stated to have been written by certain employees of the Company styling itself as a 'public interest litigation'.2. On receipt of notice from this court, the counsel appeared for the Company. Government Pleader appeared for the State of Kerala. I have heard them at some length.3. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Com...
Tolsaria Brothers Vs. Asst. Commissioner (Assmt.), Sales Tax and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-1995
Reported in: [2003]133STC638(Ker)
V.V. kamat, J. 1. The assessing authority by the order (exhibit P4) as well as the appellate authority by the order exhibit P5 have considered the factual question in great details and have reached a conclusion that the assessee (present petitioners) as well as M/s. Sakthi & Company are not different from each other in the matter of transactions. They are conducting business from one and the same place.2. Perusal of the order of the assessing authority reveals that the assessing authority had also conducted personal enquiries from which it was known that door No : VII/543 was the business place of M/s. Tolsaria Brothers (present petitioner) and that a firm in the name and style of M/s. Sakthi & Company in 1982-83 did not actually exist and that the transactions in question have been completed by M/s. Tolsaria Brothers from the same business place in the name of the pre-existing firm M/s. Sakthi & Company. A conclusion is recorded that there can be no intention other than to evade tax o...
Monthrampallipadipura Attakoya Vs. Neelathupura Kunhiseethikoya Thanga ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-05-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Ker286
ORDERK. Sreedharan, J.1. Petitioner moved E. A. No. 2/77 in E. P. No. 13/69 in O. S. No. 2-64 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Androth for restitution of the properties delivered over to the respondents as per the order passed by the learned Munsiff which was set aside by this Court and affirmed by the decision of the Supreme Court. Learned Munsiff by the impugned order, rejected that prayer. Hence this revision petition.2. Facts necessary for the disposal of this revision petition are as follows: Petitioner and one Muthukoya Thangal, predecessor in interest of the respondents, belonged to a common tarwad by name Biyyamade tarwad. It consisted of three tavazhies. One tavazhi, viz., Biyyamada tavazhy became extinct long ago. Petitioner belongs to Monthrappally Padipura tavazhy. Muthukoya Thangal, the predecessor in interest of the respondents, was the sole surviving member of the third branch, Pokkerkathiyammada tavazhy. Pro-perties belonging to common tarwad, were allotted to two tava...
N. Adithayan Vs. the Travancore Devaswom Board and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-04-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Ker169
Thomas, Ag. C.J. 1. An apparently sensitive issue has been brought to the High Court invoking Article 226 of the Constitution -- whether appointment of a person who is not a Malayala Brahmin, as 'Poojari' (Priest) of a temple, is opposed to the recognised usage followed. If so, whether the appointment is liable to be quashed, is the ancillary question.2. The above questions are mooted by the petitioner who himself is a Malayala Brahmin by community. He claims to be a worshipper of 'Kongorpilly Siva Temple' at Alangad village in Ernakulam District thereinafter referred to as 'the Siva Temple'). Administration of the temple vests with Travancore Devaswom Board (for short 'the Board') which is a statutory body created under the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 (for short 'the Act'). A large number of other temples are also being administered by the Board in exercise of the powers vested in it by the provisions of the Act. On 6-8-1993 one Shri K.S. Rajesh (third res...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »