Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1958Ker164
Kaman Nayar, J.1. The petitioner before us was, and claims that he still is, the president of the Pathanamthitta Union of the Aruvipuram Sri Narayana Dharma Paripalana Yogam (better known by its abbreviated title of the S. N. D. P. Yogam), a body incorporated under Tranvancore Regulation I of 1063 (Indian Companies Act VI of 1882). A copy of the articles of association. In other words of the rules of the Yogam, has been produced and has been marked as Ext. P-l.They contemplate the establishment of a large number of branches: unions are group organisations of the branches; and both the branches and the unions are of course, subordinate to the Yogam and subject to its control. On 20-7-1955, the General Secretary of the Yogam, acting on behalf of its Council sent the petitioner the notice, (Ex. P-3) asking him to show cause against disciplinary action for having worked against the interests of the Yogam.The charge was based on two documents appended to the notice, the first Ex. P-4 dated ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1958Ker109
Raman Nayar, J.1. The appellant in this case, the Shri Themmalapuram Bus Transport Ltd., Palghat, is a bus operator. By his order, Ext. A dated 21-9-1955, the 1st respondent, the Regional Transport Officer, Kozhikode, suspended the permit of a bus belonging to the appellant company under Section 60 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The suspension was for a period of 45 days and the order said that it was with effect from 25th October, 1955. Against this order the company appealed, and, on 12-10-1955, before the date specified in Ext. A as the date on which the suspension was to commence, it obtained a stay from the appellate authority the Secretary, Central Road Traffic Board, Madras, whose successor, the Secretary, Central Road Traffic Board, Trivandrum, is the 2nd respondent to this appeal.On 27-12-1955 by his order Ext. B, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal without saying anything about the date on which the suspension was to commence, and on 2-2-1956 the company filed a pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1958Ker207; 1958CriLJ1021
P.T. Raman Nayar, J.1. The accused in this case, a man of 45, has been sentenced to death for the murder of his wife, Kotha by name, a woman of 22. He has appealed, and the learned Sessions Judge has submitted the proceedings for confirmation of the sentence.2. The accused and the deceased were married about four months before the occurrence which took place at about mid-night on the night of the 12th November, 1956. They lived together in the accused's house for only two months and then the deceased ran away to the house of her parents, P-Ws. 1 and 3, some distance away, and was Jiving there till the time of the occurrence. Whether she did this as a result of ill-treatment as alleged by the prosecution or for no reason whatsoever as stated by the accused is a matter of no consequence. But although it is supported by no other evidence, the accused's statement in the confession, Ext. P-ll, he made before a Magistrate, that his repeated demands that his wife should go back to him went un...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker5
Varadaraja Iyengar, J.1. The matter arises in execution of the decree, on objection raised by the respondent -- 5th defendant, that the execution of the decree is barred by limitation, as regards personal execution for realisation of the mesne profits, granted under the decree. The court below upheld the objection and hence this appeal by the assignee-decree-holder.2. The decree set aside a mortgage which stood in favour of the 5th defendant in respect of plaint Item No. 3 and allowed recovery of the same, with past and future mesne profits. The decree was passed on 4-3-1121. On 18-10-1123, the first execution application was filed, praying inter alia for recovery of the mesne profits but only 'as a charge against the properties'. The prayer for personal execution against the 5th defendant was for the first time made in the second execution petition dated 22-6-1953, but as by then, more than three years had elapsed from the date of the decree the court below held such prayer was barred...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1964Ker287
ORDERC.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. In this batch of 14 writ petitions, the pen-tinners, though different, who are all owners of forest lands in the area, commonly known as the Malabar area, attack the group of four Sections, namely, Sections 48 to 51, contained in Chapter VII of the Kerala Forest Act, 1951, (Act IV of 1962), hereinafter to be referred to as the Kerala Act, as unconstitutional and as Infringing the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 19(1) (f) and (g), and 31 of the Constitution. The State of Kerala is the main respondent in most of these writ petitions, though in some of them some of the officers of the Forest Department have also been included as additional respondents.2. Though the averments contained in all these writ petitions are slightly different, all the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, as well as the learned Gov-ernment Pleader appearing for the State, have agreed to treat the averments contained in O. P. No. 1108/62 as well...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1965Ker135
ORDERC.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. The petitioners, in these writ petitions, who are engaged in the manufacture and sale of all kinds of spirituous preparations besides Allopathic tinctures, challenge the right, of the State Government to collect fees for assaying the companies' products and the costs of the Excise establishment deputed to supervise the operations of the companies concerned.2. Mr. K.K. Menon, learned counsel appearing for all these petitions, as well as the learned Advocate General appearing for the State, the respondent in all these matters, have agreed to treat the pleadings in O. P. No. 1674 of 1962 as representing the stand taken by the various petitioners regarding their grounds of attack, against the levy in question, as well as the stand taken by the State Government, to justify the said levies. Therefore, I will refer to the averments in the pleadings in the said writ petition as well as the exhibits filed by the petitioner and the State Government in that matter.3. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1966Ker192
Velu Pillai, J.1. In view of the question arising for decision, it is not necessary to relate all the facts of this ancient litigation. The appeal arises in execution of a decree which was obtained by the appellant, mortgagee of certain properties, on the basis of a lease back to the mortgagor, for recovery of possession with arrears of rent and future rent. The decree was passed on the 10th March, 1928 under the Travancore Civil Procedure Code. The question which arises for decision is whether the appellant can recover future interest, that is interest subsequent to the date of the decree, without any limit as under Section 34(1) of the Indian Civil Procedure Code or only subject to the limit imposed by Section 31(8) of the Travancore Civil Procedure Code. Section 81(1), (2) and (3) of the latter may be usefully quoted and are as follows:(1) In suits for money, no Court shall, in respect of the period antecedent to the insti-tution of the suit, allow in its decree a higher rate of int...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1967]20STC28(Ker)
S. Velu Pillai, J.1. The petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 14 of the General Sales Tax Act, 1125 (Act 11 of 1125) against an assessment made under Section 12(2). That Act, which may be referred to hereafter as the 1125 Act, was repealed with effect from the 1st April, 1963, by the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (Act 15 of 1963) which may be referred to hereafter as the 1963 Act. The appeal was decided on the 18th April, 1964. The 2nd respondent in this petition, the State Government, appealed against the said decision, under Section 39 of the 1963 Act, to the Appellate Tribunal, which by its order, exhibit P-3 dated the 5th February, 1965, overruled the preliminary objection, that the State Government had no right of appeal against the decision of the appellate authority. This petition is to quash exhibit P-3.2. Section 14 of the 1125 Act, which conferred the right of appeal on an assessee against his assessment, provided by Sub-section (4) thereof, that 'every order pas...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1968]21STC357(Ker)
M.S. Menon, C.J. 1. This Tax Revision Case is directed against the assessment of that portion of the petitioner's turnover for the year 1960-61 which had escaped assessment when the original order of assessment was made on 30th November, 1961. That order was under the General Sales Tax Act, 1125.2. The General Sales Tax Act, 1125, was repealed and replaced by the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, on 1st April, 1963. The notice regarding the proposal to assess the escaped turnover was issued only on 8th October, 1963. The contention of the assessee is that the department had no right to issue such a notice after 31st March, 1963.3. Section 4 of the Interpretation and General Clauses Act, 1125, according to the department, will sustain the proceedings impugned before us. That section corresponds to Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, and reads as follows :-.Where any Act repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter to be made, then, unless a different intention appears, the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1969Ker79; 1969CriLJ414
K. Sadasivan, J.1. The Food Inspector, Calicut Corporation has come up in appeal against the order of acquittal entered by the District Magistrate, Kozhikode in C. C. No. 194 of 1966 on the file of his Court. Prosecution was launched under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act against the accused. The first accused is the Managing Partner and the second accused the firm engaged in the sale of articles of food. On 12-8-1966 at about 12-20 noon, P. W. 1 the Food Inspector visited the godown of the firm where he found 30 bags of toor dhall kept, presumably for sale. He seized the article under Section 10(4) of the Act and took samples from two of the bags and sampled them as provided by the Act. On analysis by the Public Analyst it was found that the article was infested with insects and completely damaged, and for that reason adulterated and unfit for human consumption.2. The defence put forward was that the said 30 bags of toor dhal was not Intended for sale. Th...
Tag this Judgment!