Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: kerala Year: 1987 Page 1 of about 27 results (0.026 seconds)

Feb 24 1987 (HC)

Mohamed Usman Vs. Sainaba Umma

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Feb-24-1987

Reported in : AIR1988Ker138

..... followed every day in the company of his friends. any resentment by the wife resulted in severe assault on her. in 1978, she left her home for her parents' house. mediation followed. she returned to her husband's home, but the husband continued his habits with added vigour. in january 1981, wife sought permission to go to her parents' house, since .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 26 1987 (HC)

A. Venkappa Bhatta and ors. Vs. Gangamma and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : May-26-1987

Reported in : AIR1988Ker133

..... what it was. d.w. 2 supports the evidence of d.w. 1. admittedly, he was not even on visiting terms with p.w. 1, though claims to be a mediator in the partition. we do not consider his evidence reliable. d. w. 3 who is a son-in-law of the plaintiff and the husband of the 12th respondent also .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 24 1987 (HC)

M. Swaminathan Vs. C.K. Jayalakshmi Amma and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-24-1987

Reported in : II(1987)ACC299; [1989]66CompCas503(Ker)

balakrishnan, j.1. these two appeals arise out of a common judgment passed in mac nos. 41 of 1981 and 42 of 1981. the appellant herein was respondent no. 13 in mac no. 42 of 1981 and respondent no. 12 in mac no. 41 of 1981.2. the second petitioner in mac no. 41 of 1981 is the injured minor child and the first petitioner therein is her mother. the 2nd petitioner was studying in a tutorial college and was preparing for the sslc examination. on the date of the incident, she was returning to her house in bus no. klr-4980. the petitioner in mac no. 42 of 3981 was also a passenger in the bus. according to the claimants, the bus was overcrowded and it was being driven at a very high speed. as the bus passed a culvert, a lorry bearing registration no. bd6556 came from the opposite direction and there was collision between the two vehicles. the incident happened at a place called kokked. according to the petitioners, both the vehicles were driven negligently.3. as a result of the accident, the second petitioner in mac no. 41 of 1981 and the petitioner in mac no. 42 of 1981 sustained serious injuries. rs. 13,576'98 was claimed as compensation in mac no. 41 of 1981 and rs. 76,152 was claimed in mac no. 42 of 1981. in mac no. 41 of 1981 the tribunal granted an award of rs. 5,698 and in mac no. 42 of 1981 a sum of rs. 8,000 was awarded as compensation.4. the appellant is said to be the owner of the lorry. originally, he was not a party to the proceedings and was impleaded subsequently. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 1987 (HC)

T. Parameswaran Vs. the District Collector, Ernakulam and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Dec-17-1987

Reported in : AIR1988Ker175

john mathew, j. 1. this is an appeal filed under section 10 of the kerala dramatic performances act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the act. the district collector, ernakulam who is the first respondent herein, passed an order dt. 17-3-1987 under section 4(1) of the act, copy of which is produced as annexure iii to the memorandum of appeal, prohibiting the staging of the drama 'kristuvinte aaram thirumurivu' for a period of three months in any part of the ernakulam district. this appeal is filed by the convenor of aasayaviskara samrakshana samithy, ernakulam district which is stated to be a society for protecting the freedom of expression and speech of the public and for creating consciousness among the public to protect the said rights. originally, the district collector, ernakulam and assistant commissioner of police, ernakulam alone were the respondents in the appeal. subsequently, some organisations and individuals filed petitions for impleading them as additional respondents. on those applications additional respondents 3 and 4 were impleaded in the appeal and other petitioners were allowed to argue the appeal as intervenes. additional 3rd respondent is kerala catholic youth movement and additional 4th respondent is p. m. antony who is the author of the drama.2. the appellant filed c.m.p. 11197/1987 to stay the operation of the order under challenge. on this application our learned brothers sivaraman nair and pareed pillay, jj. passed the following order on 10-4-1987. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1987 (HC)

Kallara Sukumaran Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-30-1987

Reported in : AIR1987Ker212

malimath, c.j.1. this two matters arise out of a common reference order made by a learned single judge in two writ petitions under the following circumstances.2. shri r. balakrishna pillai was sworn in as a minister of the cabinet headed by shri k. karunakaran in 1982. at the function of the kerala congress held at ernakulam, on the 25th may, 1985, the minister made a speech which gave rise to four writ petitions, two of which have been disposed of in the year 1985.3. it is alleged that the speech of the minister was 'intended to bring out hatred, contempt or disaffection and was an attempt to excite disaffection towards the government established by law in india' and an assault on the unity and integrity of india and thus he committed a breach of his oath. the chief minister sought clarification from the minister and did not precipitate any action. shri k. c. chandy, claiming to be a citizen, filed a writ petition in this court as o.p. no. 5360 of 1985 for the issuance of a writ of quo warrantoto prevent the minister from discharging his functions as a minister. the writ petition was admitted and notice ordered on 5th june, 1985. while admitting the writ petition, a learned single judge of this court made certain ex parte observations. the minister promptly tendered his resignation immediately on the same day. on the 10th of june, another writ petition, o.p. no. 5538 of 1985 was filed by shri kallara sukumaran based practically on the same cause of action. he claimed relief .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 27 1987 (HC)

V.K. Thomas Vs. the Revenue Board Member (L.R.)

Court : Kerala

Decided on : May-27-1987

Reported in : 1988CriLJ336

orderk. sukumaran, j.1. the legal profession has more than casual connection with the arms and the governing laws. a great judge, lord atkin, spoke about law speaking in the same voice even amidst the clash of arms. (see liversedge v. anderson (1942) ac 206.) that was on the academic aspect. even on its physical features, the legal profession had much to contribute. it was lord armstrong, shortly after his sojourn as a solicitor, that gave much of concentration in the perfection of the shooting rifle. the british army used it in more wars than one. the recognition of his contribution is reflected in the patenting of the rifle after his name - armstrong's rifles. (see a history of our own times, from the diamond jubilee 1897 to the association of edward vii by justin me carthy, pages 216 to 220.) little did lord armstrong realise that in years to come, that the little weapon would be wielded by antisocial elements as well for subverting the rule of law, - the illicit distillers, the poppy barons, the plotting poachers, the sneaky smugglers and the dreadful terrorists. the abuses of arms licence, appear to be on the increase. the present is an illustrative case.2. the petitioner, who describes himself as an agriculturist, and a resident in kizhakkencherry village in alathur taluk of palghat district was armed with an arms licence, granted in the year 1980. the area of its operation was palghat district; and the duration, up to the end of the year 1982. there were complaints .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 22 1987 (HC)

Bhaskar Traders, Alavil Vs. Minikkipacha Kunhiraman

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-22-1987

Reported in : AIR1988Ker227

orderm.m. pareed pillay, j.1. revision petitioner is the judgment-debtor in e.p. 100 of 1983 in o.s. 390 of 1982 of the munsiff court, cannanore, revision petitioner filed e.a. 174 of 1984 in e.p. 100 of 1983 alleging that he is an agriculturist entitled to exemption under section 60(1)(c) of the civil p. c. that contention was rejected by the executing court mainly on the ground that such on objection was raised only when the property was proclaimed for sale and after it was adjourned on several occasions on his application. the court also held that the attempt is to procrastinate the execution proceedings.2. learned counsel for the cessionpetitioner submitted that even though thepetitioner did not contend that he is entitledto exemption under section 60(1)(c)when he received the notice of attachmenthe still can very well urge it when the propertyis brought for sale.3. the point that arises for considerationis whether the judgment-debtor can advance his contentions piece-meal and at different stages of the execution proceedings. counsel for the petitioner relied on kannan v. govindan, 1962 ker, lt 675; for the proposition that a judgment-debtor can very well contend that he is entitled to exemption under section 60(1)(c) at the time when property is brought to sale even though he failed to raise it when he received the notice of attachment. facts of the case in 1962 ker lt 675 have no application to the case in hand. in kannan's case, 1962 ker lt 675 this court was not .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 25 1987 (HC)

Balachandran Vs. Sales Tax Officer

Court : Kerala

Decided on : May-25-1987

Reported in : [1987]67STC218(Ker)

t.l. viswanatha iyer, j.1. an interesting question of law untraversed by any decision of this court arises for decision in this case. the question is whether an assessee could seek intervention in his favour by the deputy commissioner under section 35 of the kerala general sales tax act, 1963 (the 'act' for short).2. the facts leading to this original petition are short. the petitioner is running a small printing press in which he gets printed letter heads, bill books, account books, invitation cards and the like on orders placed by customers. assessments were completed on him under the act for the years 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83 accepting his returns. however, he was charged tax at the rate of 8 per cent treating the items supplied as 'paper products'.3. this court has in a series of cases, starting with p.k. dewer v. state of kerala [1974] 33 stc 73 (app.) held that such materials as those printed by the petitioner were not paper products, but general goods.4. the board of revenue had also confirmed this in a clarification (exhibit p4) issued by them to m/s. printocraft of cochin. based on these decisions as also the clarification made by the board of revenue, the petitioner filed applications before the assessing authority, the first respondent, under section 43 of the act requesting him to rectify the mistake in the assessments for the three years aforesaid by reducing the rate of tax applied from the single point rate of 8 per cent to the multi-point rate. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 1987 (HC)

Dr. M.J. Varghese and anr. Vs. the Director of Medical Education, Triv ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Aug-20-1987

Reported in : AIR1988Ker200

bhaskaran nambiar, j.1. these are two writ petitions and two petitioners, both claiming the one seat available for admission to the post graduate course in dentistry, leading to the degree of master of dental science (m.d.s.). dr. sajish kuriakose (dr. sajish for short) is the petitioner in o.p. no 5819 of 1987 and dr. varghese the petitioner in o.p. no. 5772 of 1987.2. the prospectus tor admission to the post graduate courses in the dental college attached to the medical college. trivandrum was published in the kerala gazette on 17th mar., 1987. nineteen seals were available to six specialities in the denial college. on 20-4-1987, the commissioner for government examinations invited applications for admission to all the courses. both the petitioners applied for admission to the m.d.s. course in oral and maxillafacial surgery within the prescribed time, the last date for receipt of applications being 16th may, 1987 admission to the course was on the basis of an entrance examination. both the petitioners sat for the entrance test and dr. varghese obtained the first rank and dr. sajish. the third. dr. varghese was a graduate in denial surgery (b.d.s.) from the annamalai university in tamil nadu while dr. sajish wasa b.d.s. from the kerala university. dr. varghese obtained his degree in aug. 1985 and dr. sajish in jan., 1983. the b.d.s. of the annamalai university was, however, not recognised by the kerala university. the selection committee met on 6th july, 1987 decided that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 03 1987 (HC)

R.C. Jayaprasad Vs. Controller of Examinations, University of Kerala, ...

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Sep-03-1987

Reported in : AIR1988Ker191

sreedharan, j. 1. o.p. no. 3220 of 1983 and writ appeal no. 127 of 1984 are by the same person. when he approached the university for registration to the b.sc. (engineering) semester examinations (iii to vii semesters) of april/may 1982 and oct./nov. 1982. the university rejected the same by exts. p9 and p10 memos dt. 19-10-82. o.p. 3220 of 1983 was filed for quashing those memos and for a writ of mandamus directing the university to forbear from giving effect to the order, debarring him from appearing in examinations. subsequently, the university enquired into the acts and conduct of the petitioner. a member of the syndicate who enquired into the matter filed a report to the syndicate, finding the petitioner guilty of using false and forged pre-degree mark list for getting admission in the engineering college. thereupon the petitioner was asked to show cause why pre-degree examination and b.sc. (engineering) examination of i to vii semesters be not cancelled and he be debarred permanently from taking any university examination's in the future. the .petitioner submitted a detailed reply. after considering the reply and the report of the enquiry officer, the syndicate by ext. p14 order dt. 10-10-1983, imposed the punishment already proposed. o.p. no. 9989 of 1983 was filed challenging ext. p14 order. when it came up for admission, a learned single judge dismissed the same. so the writ appeal 127 of' 1984 has been preferred. since exts. p19 and p10 memos no longer subsist by .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //