Kerala Court April 1997 Judgments
Vigilance Council, Thiruvalla and ors. Vs. Thiruvalla Municipality
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-03-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Ker350
ORDERP. Shanmugam, J.1. Petitioners are public sector organisation and resident of Thiruvalla Municipality. They have objected to the proposal of the Municipality to increase the rate of property tax from 13% to 15%. The Municipality in reply has stated that the property tax in Thiruvalla Municipality was collected at the same rate of 13% over since 1978-79, and the Municipality is presently faced with heavy financial liabilities hampering the development activities. The O.P. is against this order.2. The petitioners' case is that enhancement of rate of tax is excessive and the Municipalities is having sufficient funds to meet requirements.3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners strenuously pleaded that the Municipality has no jurisdiction to enhance the rate of tax in between the general revisions by referring to Section 238 of the Kerala Municipality Act. According to this the property tax will be assessed once in every 5 years and therefore the same principle should...
Tag this Judgment!Devassia Joseph and anr. Vs. Joseph George
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-03-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ3410
T. Ramachandran, J.1. This appeal arises from the judgment and decree of the Sub-Judge of Thodupuzha in O.S. No. 97/85.2. The appellants were the defendants in O.S. No. 97/85 before the Sub-Court of Thodupuzha. The suit was filed by the respondent as plaintiff or realisation of the amount due under three pronotes dated 1-10-1983, 3-11 -1983 and 3-12-1983 executed by the defendants in favour of one Kuruvilla Varghese and later endorsed in favour of the plaintiff by the said Kuruvilla Varghese. The facts are that Kuruvilla was the grand father of the plaintiff. He was a moneylender. The defendants borrowed Rs. 40,0007- on 1-10-1983 and executed Ext. A3 pronote. Later on 3-11-1983 Rs. 15,0007- was borrowed and executed Ext. A4 pronote. Then on 3-12-1983 Rs. 25,0007- was borrowed and executed Ext. A5 pronote. These pronotes were endorsed by Kuru villa Varghese in favour of the plaintiff and as a holder in due course the plaintiff demanded the amount from the defendants by sending a lawyer ...
Tag this Judgment!K.A. Abdul Jaleel Vs. T.A. Sahida
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-02-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Ker269; II(1997)DMC294
Balakrishnan, J.1. The respondent in O. P. No. 343/96 on the file of the Family Court, Ernakulam is the appellant. The respondent herein filed a petition before the Family Court for a declaration of her right over one item of immovable property and also for partition and separate possession of a share in another item of immovable property. The respondent alleged that her marriage with the appellant was on 3-1-1988 and two children were born in the wed-lock. The respondent alleged that the appellant acquired 9 cents of land mentioned as 'A' schedule in the petition in his name with the funds provided by the respondent. The respondent also contended that 'B' Schedule property was purchased by the appellant with the funds raised by him by selling the gold ornaments of the respondent. The appellant is working in a Gulf country. It is admitted that the appellant divorced the respondent on 1-11-1995 in accordance with the Muslim rites.2. The appellant filed a counter statement before the Fam...
Tag this Judgment!Sukumaran V. and anr. Vs. Sodaran M.N. and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-02-1997
Reported in: (1998)ILLJ163Ker
Patnaik, J.1. The petitioners in O.P. 14996/96 have preferred this appeal against the order dated October 7, 1996 of the learned single Judge by which their prayer for cancellation of order of transfer from Talappilly to Kunnamkulam and Trichur respectively was rejected.2. The appellants were working as Senior Accountants in the Sub- Treasury, Talappilly for more than 8 years. By Ext. P1 order issued by the District Treasury Officer, Trichur (Respondent No. 2), the first appellant V. Sukumaran was transferred to Sub-Treasury, Kunnamkulam and the second appellant T.J. Kuruvilla was transferred to Additional Sub-Treasury, Thrissur which are situated at a distance of about 30 Kms. from Talappilly. The appellants contended that the transfer was made by way of punishment on the following grounds:The first respondent was harassing the appellants due to some union rivalry. The basis of the transfer is the report submitted by him to second respondent, The District Treasury Officer, who in turn...
Tag this Judgment!Shyni Vs. George and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-01-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Ker231; II(1997)DMC676
ORDERP.K. Balasubramanyan, J.1. This Original Petition is filed by a spouse to a subsisting marriage. She is the wife. She filed a suit against the other spouse to the marriage, her husband and her father-in-law. The suit was for recovery of amounts belonging to her and given into the hands of either the husband or the father-in-law at or about the time of the marriage for being held by them. It could probably be contended that they were to hold them in trust for her. She instituted the suit originally in the Family Court, Trichur. By an order of this Court, the said suit was transferred to the Family Court, Ernakulam for being tried with an application for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the husband in the District Court of Kottayam. This Court transferred that proceeding also to the Family Court, Ernakulam. 2. Before the Family Court, Ernakulam an objection was taken that since one of the parties arrayed as a defendant is not a party to the marriage but is only the father-in-...
Tag this Judgment!Rajappan and ors. Vs. Sankaran Sudhakaran
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-01-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Ker315
Balasubramanyan, J. 1. This revision is by the legal representatives of the second judgment-debtor in O.S. No. 227 of 1975 on the file of the Munsiff's Court of Punaloor. The respondent-decree-holder obtained a decree against the second judgment-debtor, the father of the revision petitioners, their brother who figured as the first judgment-debtor, and their mother who figured as the third judgment-debtor for a perpetual injunction restraining the judgment debtors from trespassing into the decree schedule property, taking income therefrom, destroying the boundaries thereof and from interfering with the rights of the decree-holder to take income from the property and from in any manner causing disturbance to his possession. The Execution Petition, E.P. 118 of 1985 was filed against judgment-debtors 1 and 3 and the other legal representatives of the second judgment-debtor, the father complaining that they had violated the decree granted to the decree-holder. An objection was filed by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Karthiyayani Amma Vs. Narayanan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-01-1997
Reported in: II(1998)DMC57
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. Defendant is the appellant and the plaintiff is the respondent. Plaintiff Narayanan Nair married the defendant Karthiyayani Amma on 5th May, 1961 at the Thiruvangead Sree Ramaswami Temple in accordance with the customs of the community to which they belonged. In that wedlock, a child was born and she was named Mynavathi. The conjugal relationship lasted for five years. Then the spouses lived apart for about two years and five months. Plaintiff filed an application for dissolution of marriage in the Munsiff's Court, Tellicherry as O.P. No. 5/1996. An order of divorce was obtained. According to the plaintiff, even though the marriage was dissolved, certain mediators intervened and they re- quested the plaintiff and the defendant to live together considering the future of the child. Thus, they lived together from 8th January, 1968 and two children were born to them.2. Plaintiff further submits that there was no customary marriage conducted, but a registered document...
Tag this Judgment!Chalakuttiyil Mutteri Karthiyayani Amma Vs. Padinhare Talasseri Veetti ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Apr-01-1997
Reported in: I(1999)DMC52
S. Sankarasubban, J. 1. Defendant is the appellant and the plaintiff is the respondent. Plaintiff Narayanan Nair married the defendant Karthiyanyini Amma on 5th May, 1961 at the Thiruvanaged Sree Ramaswami Temple in accordance with the customs of the community to which they belonged. In that wedlock, a child was born and she was named Mynavathi. The conjugal relationship lasted for five years. Then the spouses lived apart for about 2 years and 5 months. Plaintiff filed an application for dissolution of marriage in the Munsiff's Court, Tellicherry as O.P. No. 5/1996. An order of divorce was obtained. According to the plaintiff, even though the marriage was dissolved, certain mediators intervened and they requested the plaintiff and the defendant to live together considering the future of the child. Thus, they lived together from 8th January, 1968 and two children were born to them.2. Plaintiff further submits that there was no customary marriage conducted, but a registered document was ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›