Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1967]37CompCas138(Ker)
ORDERKrishnamoorthy Iyer, J.1. The Subordinate Judge of Meenachil in execution of the decree in O. S. No. 42 of 1951 passed by the District Court of Kottayam in favour of the Bank of Meenachil Ltd. (in liquidation) passed the order sought to be revised returning the claim petition or objection to attachment filed by the revision petitioner under Order 21, Rule 58, Civil Procedure Code, to the attachment of immovable properties effected before judgment on the ground that under Section 456 of the Banking Companies Act, 1949, the High Court alone has exclusive jurisdiction to entertain and decide the same.2. The official liquidator filed Report No. 82 in B, C. P. No. 6 of 1951, which relates to the winding up of the Bank of Meenachil Ltd., under Section 45C(2) of the Banking Companies Act, 1949, bringing to the notice of this court the pendency of the proceedings to execute the decree in O. S. No. 42 of 1951 of the District Court, Kottayam, in the Meenachil sub-court. Since this court did...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1967Ker259
K.K. Mathew, J. 1. This is an application for a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order quashing Ext. P-8 order passed by the Administrator, Union Territory of Laocadives, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands. Sheikriyammadath was an ancient family having its residence at Androth Island, forming part of the Laccadive Islands. The family was governed by the customary law of the island. There were two tavazhies in the family one tavazhi was represented by one Saudabl; the petitioner is her son, and represents the tavazhi now. The other tavazhi consisted of two brothers, Sheik Koya and Muthu Koya. Muthn Koya died and the tavazbi was being represented by Shiek Koya. He died sometime in 1963'and that tavazhi is now represented by respondents 2 to 7, the legal representatives of Sheik Koya. The two tavaznles agreed to divide the properties of the tarwao by a razi dated 8-12-1941 filed in the Amin's Katchery in the Island. According to the provisions of this razi, even after partition, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1967Ker228; 1967CriLJ1511
ORDERM. Madhavan Nair, J.1. The material question involved in this Crl. R. P., which centres round Section 122 of the Evidence Act, is of considerable general importance, but not of easy solution. Though I have been treated with elaborate discussions by counsel, displaying considerable learning and research, I must confess that I do not feel clarified of all obscurity about it.2. This motion is in a prosecution for defamation launched on September 17, 1965, before the District Magistrate, Trivandrum, by a father-in-law (hereinafter the complainant), against one of his sons-in-law (hereinafter the accused on account of imputations made in three letters sent by the latter on July 18, 28 and 30. 1964, from Bombay, his place of employment to his wife in Trivandrum, who handed them over to the complainant in about September, 1966, when dissensions arose between her and the accused.3. Counsel for the accused before the District Magistrate raised a preliminary objection to the prosecution on ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1967Ker215; [1967]65ITR81(Ker)
ORDER1. The petitioner if the head and manager of a Nambudiri Illom. The Illom was assessed to tax under the Agricultural Income-tax Act. 1950, in respect of the assessment year 1958-59, 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62. All the four assessment orders were passed on 14-3-1962. 2. Section 3 of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, provides that agricultural income-tax at the rate or rates specified in the Schedule to that Act shall be charged for each financial year in accordance with and subject to the previsions of that Act on the total agricultural income of the previous year. Sub-sections (3) and (4) of that section as they stood on the date of the assessment orders--14-3-1962--read as follows: '3. In the case of an undivided Aliyasanthana family or branch or Maruniakkathayam tarwad including a Nmbudiri family or a family like that of the Moothathu or any other class governed by the law applicable to Nambudiries consisting of more than five members and whose agricultural income exceeds...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1968]69ITR304(Ker)
This writ petition raises the question of assessability to agricultural income-tax under the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, of the properties of the Valiamma Thampuran Kovilakam Estate, known compendiously as the V.T.K. Estate. It is agreed that the properties of the V.T.K. Estate comprise the ancestral properties of the Cochin Royal Family as well as the amounts donated from time to time by the Maharaja of Cochin for the maintenance of the members. The petitioner is the manager of the V.T.K. Estate. The management of the estate is governed by the provision of the Cochin Proclamation 9 of 1124. the writ petition seeks a declaration that the V.T.K. Estate is not assessable to agricultural income-tax and a writ of certiorari to quash exhibit P-2 notice, and P-4 order, of the 1st respondent calling upon the petitioner to submit a return of the total agricultural income of the estate for the year 1962-63, and holding after objection that the estate was assessable.I may notice - only to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1967Ker216; 1967CriLJ1334
ORDERM.U. Isaac, J. 1. This is a petition to revise the order of the Munsif-Magistrate, Ettnmanoor dismissing an application which the petitioner made under Section 488 Cr. P. C. for getting maintenance from the respondent.2. The respondent married the petitioner in April 1948, while he was in Military service. The petitioner's case is that, while this marriage remains in force, the respondent married another lady by a registration in December 1951, and thereafter he neglected to maintain the petitioner. She complained to the Military authorities as a result of which he began to send her some money. Subsequently, he was discharged from the Military and he had not been giving her any maintenance during the past one year.On these and other allegations which are not necessary to be stated here, she claimed a monthly maintenance of Rs. 60/- from the respondent. The respondent, while admitting the marriage, contended that the petitioner left his house contrary to his instructions soon after...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1968Ker42; (1967)ILLJ766Ker
Govindan Nair, J. 1. The question is whether the equality of opportunity in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State guaranteed by Article 16(1) of the Constitution of India, has been denied to the petitioner, and whether the provision in Article 16(1) that there shall be no discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them in respect of any employment or office under the State, has been violated.2. The State Government by letter No. 42818/C3/63-2 Home dated 8-il-1963 requested the Public Service Commission to advise 24 candidates from the Bar for appointment as Munsiffs in the scale of Rs. 300-700 in the Judicial Service of the Kerala State. A Notification No. RII(20) 10612/63 dated 28th November, 1963, (Ext. PI) was then issued by the Public Service Commission and published in the Kerala Gazette dated 3rd December, 1963, inviting applications from qualified candidates for directrecruitmen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1968)IILLJ233Ker
Raman Nayar, J. 1. By a series of orders beginning with G.O. (MS) No. 91/66/ Home dated 5-3-1966 and ending with G.O. (P) 376/ 66/ Fin. dated 12-8-1966, the State Government raised the age of superannuation of the members of the several State Public Services (excepting those of the Last Grade Service for whom the age was already 60) from 53 to 58. And. accordingly, rule 60 (a) of Part I the Kerala Service Rules (the K. S. R. for short-those are rules made under the proviso to article 309 of the Constitution) which specifies the age of superannuation and provides for compulsory retirement at that age, was amended on 18-1-1667 to read as follows:- '60(a). Except as otherwise provided in these rules the date of compulsory retirement of an officer other than in last grade service is the date on which he attains the age of 58 years. He may be retained after this date only with the sanction of Government on Public grounds which must be recorded in writing, but he must not be retained after t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1968Ker203
1. This is a reference under Section 64 (1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. The question referred reads as follows:--'Whether on the facts and in the circum-stances's of the case, the entire property in respect of which the deed dated the 7th March 1953 was executed by the deceased, was liable to inclusion in the estate of the deceased, having regard to the provisions of Sections 10 and 12 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 '2. The deed styles itself as a 'settlement deed'. It forms Annexure C to the Statement of the Case. The original, we are told, is in Malayalam and is entitled an'3. The deed was executed by one Ismail Kunju in favour of his three sons and four daughters. It was executed, as stated in the question, on the 7th March 1953. Ismail Kunju died only on the 39th July 1955, that is. beyond the period of time specified in Section 9 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. It follows that there can be no question of any liability to estate duty except on the basis of Section 10 or Section 12 of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1968)IILLJ225Ker
M.U. Isaac, J.1. These two writ petitions also out of an unfortunate rivalry between three registered trade unions representing the workers in the Indian Aluminium Company, Ltd. (hereinafter referred to at the company). The company has about 750 workers, including the office staff which consists of clerical and non-clerical sections. The office staff has got a strength of 113, of which 53 belong to the clerical section. There is some dispute regarding their exact number. The Aluminium Factory Workers' Union (hereinafter referred so as the first union) has been in existence for a very long number of years; and to was the only trade union which represented the workers in the company till very recently. The Indian Aluminium Company Employees' Union (hereinafter referred to as the second union) was formed in 1965: and it claims a membership of 134, including in few workers in the non-clerical section of the office staff. According to the first union, the strength of the second union is muc...
Tag this Judgment!