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

1982 Supreme(Ker) 216

SUKUMARAN
Mathew – Appellant
Versus
Kuruvilla – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. A police station is hardly the venue and the small hours after midnight hardly an auspicious time, for the resolution of what is essentially a civil dispute. A transaction entered into at such a place and at such a time, is likely to be viewed as susceptible to vitiating influences. That was what had happened in Kottayam town; and in the year 1970,

2. Those who feel vanquished by unjust official might are not always likely to give expression to their moral indignation by resort to the process of law. Quite often, people suffer in silence, such indignities and such losses. The plaintiff in the case, however, with commendable courage, sought to resort to a court of law for the vindication of his just claims. The courts below have granted him relief. Whether the judgments and decrees of the courts below are vitiated, so vitiated on any substantial question of law as to invite interference in the attenuated jurisdiction of a second appeal, is the matter arising for consideration in this case.

3. The salient facts relevant for the issue arising for decision in the second appeal may be briefly stated as follows:

4. The defendant is the appellant in the second appeal. He was a


















































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