SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(Ker) 444

SUKUMARAN
Gourisankar – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent


Judgment :-

Those who ordinarily appear in court for others, are themselves in court now. They complain against an illegality on the part of the Government; on the part of the Law Department of the Government. A legal question is involved concerning a Central enactment. Viewed from another aspect, a larger one of constitutional perspective is also involved in view of a somewhat strange stand taken by the Government

in its counter-affidavit. The petitioners, as hinted earlier, are legal practitioners, Advocates, practicing in different courts, from one end of the State to the other. They had been appointed by the Government, as Notary Public. Most of them have been appointed under the provisions of the Notaries Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), a comprehensive legislation adopted by the Parliament in the early years of the Republic. The appointment is for a term but is renewable. The statutory requirements for the renewal were complied with by all of them. They were, however, confronted with the policy decision of the State Government. It was through a section officer of the Law Department that this policy decision was conveyed to the court by a counter-affidavit. Th






























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top