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

2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 16313

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
HAMSA.A.P. – Appellant
Versus
SECRETARY – Respondent


Advocates:
P.B.KRISHNAN, P.B.SUBRAMANYAN, MANU VYASAN PETER, SABU GEORGE, RIJI RAJENDRAN

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 15th day of November, 2023

This regular second appeal has been filed under Section 100 r/w Order XLII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC), challenging the decree and judgment dated 29.01.2022 in A.S.No.35/2020 on the files of the Additional District Court-I, Manjeri, arising out of the decree and judgment dated 20.12.2019 in O.S.No.430/2016 on the files of the Munsiff's Court, Manjeri. The appellants herein are plaintiff No.2 and supplemental plaintiffs 3 to 11 in the above suit and the respondents herein are the defendants.

2. Heard Sri.P.B.Krishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as Sri.Riji Rajendran, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd. in detail. Perused the records.

3. While admitting this appeal, my learned predecessor, as per order dated 25.03.2022, formulated the following substantial questions of law:

“i) Is the installation of an Electrical Transformer covered by the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 ?

ii) Is not Sec.10, 17(1) and 17(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 confined to the installation of a telegraph line and post by

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