live-wireEvolution: The Administrative system of Travancore reveals that formerly there were only two jails-one at Trivandrum and the other at Quilon, for securing the convicts maintained by the Sirkar and they wereEmployed to repair the roads, etc. every day.The jails were formerly under the medical charge of Native Physicianswhose pay was mere six or seven rupees per mensem which resulted inuncleanliness and excessive mortality. About 1860 A.D. the medicalcharge was transferred to the Durbar Physician as Principal Medical Officer of Government and to each jail was attached medical subordinates.The 1862-63 Administrative Report mentions, besides, the three principal jails at Trivandrum, Quilon and Allepey, small jails had been attached toZillah Criminal Courts chiefly for the confinement of prisoners under trial.30Even when the number of jails was raised to four in 1872-73, no iaj| existed in the present Kanniyakumari area. All the jails were under the general control of the Dewan. The charge of the jails was vested with the Superintendents or Jailers.

The prisoners were locked up at night and were guarded by jail warders and brigade sepoys. Prisoners sentenced to simple imprisonment had no work, while those sentenced to rigorous imprisonment had work of various kinds like repairing of roads, garden work, carting provisions, drawing water for cooking and cleaning purposes, making their own fetters, etc. Brahmins and females of all classes were exempt form hard labour or labour of any kind.

Food supplied to prisoners varied depending on the nature of their imprisonment and work. Civil debtors were paid by their creditors at the rate of five chs. Each per day through the Courts. All prisoners, except civil debtors, were given a cloth every six month and a carpet every third year.

An hospital, located in a separate building was attached to the jail and the prisoners taken ill were removed to this hospital. At the time of epidemics, suffering prisoners were removed to the Jail Hospital, while ordinary patients were treated within the jail building.

A Sub-Assistant Surgeon was the head of the Jail Medical Wing and he was assisted by two Apothecaries. Interviews with pleaders and relatives were permitted daily.

No remission system, whatsoever, existed. The Superintendent of tne Central Jail was authorised to inflict six cuts on the back with a rattan for insubordination or breach of jail discipline but there was no deprivation of food, as one of the punishments.

At that time, there was no authorised Code of Prison Regulations in force. There was one Court jail at Nagercoil,

In 1-880, steps were taken towards the reformation of jail administration based on a report submitted by the Superintendent of Central Jail, who was sent to the British jail at Cannanore to study the jail discipline and the system of jail administration in vogue there. As a result, intramural labour was slowly and gradually introduced in the Central Jail. Native cloths, cotton carpet, coir rugs, chain fetters and carts for jail use were manufactured by convict labour.

The scale of dietary was revised and improved on the pattern of British Prisons. During 1881-82, a printing press was established. Provision was made for the inspection of the jail by official visitors. Provision was also made for the release of convicts suffering from incurable diseases, disabling them for ever from the commission of crimes.

During 1890-91, a set of rules sanctioned by the Maharaja provided for the grant of a small money to destitute convicts on their release, to enable them to reach their homes. For this purpose, the Superintendent was given a permanent advance of Rs.15 a month. A committee, with the Durbar Physician as President, was appointed. In 1895-96, a regulation was passed adopting the British Indian Enactment (1894 Act). To acquaint himself with the details of prison administration, the Superintendent was sent on deputation to Madras and Vellore.

During 1896-97, some of the recommendations of the Jail Committee were adopted which were (a) Introduction of convicts ticket, (b) introduction of fortnightly weighments, (c) adoption of steps for the recognition of habitual offenders (d) introduction of dietary prescribed in the Prison Rules, etc.33 The next year, the Prisons Regulation was fully brought into operation, Some of the important features of this are disbandment of police guard attached to jail, abolition of extramural labours, introduction of remission system and the introduction of taking finger impressions of the convicts.

In 1898-99, the system of taking anthropometrical measurement of the convicts was discontinued and taking of finger tip impressions was substituted in its place. The system of awarding Good Conduct stripes to warders was also introduced in this year.

Though not much was expressed about the district Jail, the management of the Central Jail has always been favourably commented upon by high authorities as jail visitors.

Until 1956, whatever the prison administration system was in force in erstwhile Travancore State was followed in the areas that are now in Kanniyakumari district, since it was a part of Travancore-Cochin State. In 1956, these areas were seperated from Travancore-Cochin State and were brought under the administrative control of the then Madras State. Even while under the erstwhile Travancore State, there was only one sub-jail at Nagercoil. However, there were lock-ups at Agastiswaram,

Bboothapandi, Colachel, Eraniel, KaJktiarn,  Kunrmna

Tiruvattar and Vilavancode.

In an administration Report of Travancore, there k

functioning of eight prisons at various stations Iike hh/Atm Agasthiswaram, Kottar, Eraniel, Kalkulam, Vilavancode,            .

Thiruvattar in the district during 1910/14 The number of’were in the lock-ups was 180. The number of prisoners, whothese prisons during 1911-12 and 1912-13 were 476 arid 402 The Sub-Jail, Nagercoil located in the Nagercoil Town during 1955 by the Travancore and Cochin Government and now it accommodation for 84 prisoners, This was a unit of Wwm administration of Kerala State and subsequently merged with ifa§ Tamil Nadu State, consequent on the reorganisation of States, in 1960,Besides this, two other sub-jails, one at Thuckalay and another  Kuzhithurai have also been established in the district. The Thikuricy sub-jail has the facilities to accommodate 24 prisoners; v/hite itw Kuzhithurai sub-jail can accommodate 16 prisoners.

The Sub-jails are meant for the confinement of remand and unionTim prisoners. Convict prisoners who are sentenced to imprisonment for om month and less are kept in these jails. Prisoners sentenced to one month and above, are sent to Central Prison, Palayamcoitai for under going punishment awarded by the courts.

From the very beginning, Nagercoil sub-jail, is under the control of the prison department. The administrative control of the sub jail Thuckalay and Kuzhithurai were transferred from the Revenue Department to Prison Department during March 1983. 36

The superigtendent, Central Prison, Palayamacottai is the Controlling Officer of these sub-jails. Each sub-jail is incharge of one Assistant Jailor or Superintendent, assisted by Warders in the day-to day administration In Nagercoil sub-jail, apart from the Assistant Jailor, one junior assistant one Chief Head Warder and six Grade-ll Warders are working, Thuckalay and Kuzhithurai sub-jails have one Assistant Jailor, two First Grade Warders and eight Grade-ll Warders each.Remand and under trial prisoners in the sub-jails are not utilised for any work. However, their services         The sick patients are attended to by the visting Medical Officers of the local Government hospitals. Serious cases are transferred to Government Headquarters Hospital for treatment. Duty Counsels of the State Legal Aid Board are attached to all central prisons and sub-jails. The lawyers attached to these Duty Counsels visit the sub-jails regularly and render necessary legal assistance to the needy prisoners. The undertrial prisoners may also avail of this opportunity to get thier trials disposed of quickly and in the meantime to move the courts for bail etc.

Details of total annual expenditure incurred for the maintenance of Sub-Jails in Kanniyakumari district for the past five years (1983-87) are furnished below:—

$/;        Year    Expenditure

No,      incurred (IN RUPEES;

0)         !           (2)        (3)

1 1983 3,69,819
2 1984 4,12,337
3 1985 4,74,719
4 1986 4,91,396
5 1987 5,81,755





SL Name of 1983       1984

A/b.     the sub C         R         C         R


(2)        (3)        (4)        (5)        (6)


Nagercoil         470 3069         528      3348


Thckalay –       510      52        758


Kuzhithurai     16        812      27        888

Total 486 4391            607      4994

1986    1987

C         R         C         R         C         R

(7)        (8)        (9)        (10)      (11)      (12)

770 3430         419      3919    180      435

61        817      122      1009    131      140

902      6          618      11        125

847 5149         547      5546    422      70C




C – Convicts    R         –           Remand           and      under   trial      prisoners



District Legal Aid Committee:           The      District            Legal Aid Committee j

Functioning at Nagercoil and the District Judge is the Ex-officio President of the Committee. Apart from this, are established two Taluk Committees one at Thuckalay and the other at Kuzhithurai. The Sub-Judges of the respective places are the Presidents of those taluk committees. There are A and B panel of lawyers in the committee to render legal assistance to the pubic, who approach them for legal-aid.

Bar Associations:        There   are       four Bar Associations one each at

Nagercoil, Thuckalay, Kuzhithurai and Eraniel in the district. More than 200 members are enrolled at the Nagercoil Bar Association, and about 125 each at Thuckalay and Kuzhithurai. The Bar Association, Eraniel has 30 members. The members of this Bar Association appear in civil and criminal cases.

Evolution of Law Courts. : In olden days, the judicial system was not regular and the powers were exercised by officials appointed by the Government. The officials of the judiciary were the executive officers. They were called by names Sarvadhikarikar, the Valia Sarvadhikariakar and the Dalawa. 41 To these, may be added the village and taluk Thudasers (Orbitrators) and a Divisional officer designated Melvicharippukar whose duties were purely judicial. They were guided in their judicial deliberations by the Codes of Manu, by customary laws and usages known as


‘Mamools’. There were no written legal codes to guide the judical officers. The common method of trial was trial by oaths and ordeals. Sometimes, trial by ordeal of fire was employed. In this trial, the accused had to dip his hand in the melted butter or melted lead to prove his innocence.       Such ordeals especially where the accused was a

Nambudhiri took place at holy places like Suchindrum. But, there was no regularity in inflicting punishments on the accused ; the nature and gravity of offences were seldom taken into consideration. Sometimes, considerations of caste and social status of the accused played an important role in awarding punishment. The task of hearing cases and dispensing justice was given to Naduvalis and Desavalis, who were exclusively appointed Judical officers. Cases concerning capital offences were referred to the king, who was considered to be the fountain head of justice. In passing orders for execution, the king often consulted the Learned Pandits in his Court.

Ummini Thampi, during his Dewanship (1809-1811), tried to reform the judical procedure, by establishing four courts of justice about 1810. They


known as Insudtl Cutchenes Each of these courts had a Nayar 1 judo® assisted by a small office These courts suffered from two defects lack of definite rules on procedure for the trial of cases and the consequent delay in dispensing justice, and extreme corruption

But. the general administration of Travancore State during the Dewanship of Ummini Thampi was so inefficient and corrupt that chaos and confusion became the order of the cay. Reorganisation of the administration, especially the judicial administration became inevitable In 1811, Queen Lakshmi Bai dismissed Umini Thampi and apointed Col Munro, the then British Resident in Travancore. as the Dew an4 Col Munro strove hard to eradicate the evils of tyranny, delay and corruption in the administration of justice. He first abolished the Insuaff Cutchenes and took upon himself the responsibility of trying cases. He made provisions in the legal system by which people were able to bring their suits to him. A large number of people surrounded him every day demanding justice and Col. Munro patiently heard a few of them daily with the assistance of the Learned Pandits. Though it proved to be an improvement on the system that existed hither to, yet, it bristled with many difficulties of which the inordinate delay in deciding cases was the most serious one After a full understanding of the state of justice and the working of the legal machinery in the state, a new legal Code and Procedure for the administration of justice was drafted by Col.Munro in 1811. They were known as “Sattavariolad’ and were mainly based on Dharma Sastra, customs and usages prevailing in the country and at the same time, it incorporated some of the good features in the English legal system. When the ”Sattavariolad’ were submitted to Rani Lakshmi Bai for sanction, she promulgated an Ordinance for the adoption of the new regulation. The only exception she made was, the retention of the system or trial by ordeal, which Col. Munro wanted to put an end to. But, it was specified that this mode of trial was to be resorted to only in particular cases, that too, on obtaining prior permission from the Dewan.

The year 1811 is an important landmark in the history of Judicial Administration in the Travancore State in general and in the Kanniyakumari District in particular. The Zillah Courts (District Courts) were established for the first time in 1811. There were seven such courts in Travancore and one of the Zillah courts was located at Padmanabhapuram. The Zillah courts were under the orders of the Dewan, who was then tin? Supreme Head of all departments. The Zillah Court at Padmanabhapuram was under the control and supervision of the


Dewan. It had three judges to try cases, and a Pandit, learned in the Dharma Sastras, to assist the judges in the disposal ot cases according to the injunctions of the sastras. The Zillah Court at Padmanabhapuram, \m other Zillah Courts, tried all cases-civil criminal or police iind reported to the Dewan, whose approval in each case was necessary to give effect to their proceedings. This patriarchal system remained in force till 1814 when an appellate Huzoor Court was formed for the hearing of appeals from the decisions of the Zillah Courts.MThis court still formed rather an appendage of the Dewan’s Cutchery than an independent Court of Justice”

In 1817, the Tahsildars were empowered to try petty police cases and in 1831, the Munsif Courts were established and were vested with Jurisdiction in petty police cases and in civil suits not exceeding Rs.100 value. In 1834, a general scheme of judicial administration was founded on the arrangements obtaining in the Madras Presidency and was carried out by means of seven regulations. The First five regulations dealt with the Civil Procedure and the constitution of the Munisif, Zillah and Appeal Courts. By regulation I, the Munsifs were empowered to try all cases upto Rs.100 but they were prohibited to try suits against the Sirkar and suits against Europeans. Regulation-ll provided for the adjudication of suits by Panchayats. Regulation-Ill formulated procedure for the execution of the decrees of all courts by the Munsifs. By Regulation IV, the Zillah Court was reconstituted and this Court was to consist of a Hindu Judge, a Christian Judge and a Pandit. This Regulation also gave unlimited pecuniary jurisdiction to the Zillah Courts. By this Regulation, the number of Courts was reduced from seven to five. By Regulation V, an appeal Court, known first as the Sadar and subsequently as the High Court, was established comprising three Hindu Judges, one Christian judge, a Sastri and a Mufti. The V Regulation invested the Tahsildar with police authority and the Zillah Court with criminal jurisdiction. The Regulations VII and VIII authorised Judges of the Appeal Court to function as Sessions Courts. RegulationVII created Cirucit Judge, and in additon to defining their powers it laid down the procedure to be observed in the trial and commitment of Criminal cases. These Regulations, though subsequent^ modified in some respects, form still the ground work of the presenl judicial machinery. From now, the Munsifs were to be appointed by Roya Commission and were to be above 25 years of age with experience o’ having worked in the Munsif’s Office or Zillah Offices. They were also tc take an oath before the Appeal Court, promising to discharge their dut\ with diligence and integrity. They were forbidden from deciding cases ir which their relatives, subordinates or dependents were parties. Theii jurisdiction was limited to money suits. The plaints were to be written or stamped cadjan obtained from the Courts at fixed prices. Depositions|0 to be taken down and evidence recorded in open court. When there Were too many cases on the file of the Munsif’s Courts some of them were transferred to the District Judge to be tried in his Court. The Administration of Justice was improved by the passing of new laws and enhancing the authority of the judicial officers under due safeguards.

In 1847, sub-offices of police were appointed to exercise the powers of the police officer or Tahsildar during his absence for the commitment of


cases only. In 1849, a regulation was passed reducing the number of Munsifs and relieving them of the duty of executing degrees passed by the Appeal and Zillah Courts. An important administrative change was made in 1854.51 Revenue divisions were formed and the Dewan Peshkars, who were till then doing duty in the Huzur Cutchery in charge of special departments, were sent out to take charge of them, with powers of general control. They were also empowered to have supervision in all matters of Revenue, Magisterial and Police. They were still subject to the orders of the Dewan as Head of the Administration and Chief Magistrate.

In 1856, Circuit courts were abolished and in their places, Sessions Courts were constituted.52 In 1860, Sessions Courts were also abolished and the Zillah Courts were invested with full powers of the former Circuit Judges.53

In 1861, the British Codes of Civil and Criminal Procedure with suitable changes, were introduced in the Kanniyakumari District along with the rest of the Travancore State.54 The Chief Court of appeal was now called Sadar Court instead of Appeal Court. The Sadar Court was divided into two, the civil and criminal; each presided over by two judges. This division resulted in the prompt disposal of cases. The five Zillah Courts were abolished and in their place four District Courts with both Civil and Criminal powers were established. One District Court was set up in Padmanabhapuram Division.

In 1863, Regulation I was passsed for the punishment of offences against the telegraph. Regulation-ll, created copy right in books. By Regulation I of 1864, breaches of Contract by artisans and workmen were made punishable. In the same year, another Regulation was passed defining the status of Vakils, their discipline and rights in relation to the Courts. A Regulation passed in 1867 legalised the employment of vakils in criminal cases.By Regulation I of 1865, single judges of Zillah Courts vver empowered to try and determine both civil and criminal cases. One of th Regulations passed in 1865, legalized admission of approval in criminal cases, 55 Regulation I of 1871 provided for the better conduct of business In tim Sadat Court by giving a casting vote to the Chief Judge in certain cases, in the same year, another Regulation was passed to relieve the Oewah of Magisterial functions and Criminal cases, and for redistribution of Magisterial powers generally. Regulation I of 1877 empowered sub offices of a district to dispose of police cases during the Tahsildars tours. Regulation II of 1878, remodelled the Constitution and provided for tho conduct of the business in the Sadar Court. Regulation II and III of 1880 adopted with necessary modifications the Indian Penal Code, with the Whipping Act and the Indian Criminal Procedure Code, as the law of the land.

In 1881-82, the whole judicial system was reconstituted by means of two enactments.56 The first Travancore Civil Courts Regulation of 1881 remodelled the structures of the Munsif and District Courts. It conferred on Government, the power to regulate the number and territorial jurisdiction of the Civil Courts. It raised the pecuniary jurisdiction from Rs.200/- to 500/- and also vested them with Small Cause Jurisdiction in suits relating to personal property of the value of not more than Rs.20/-. It also declared the decisions of the District Court as final, in cases of appeal involving money or other personal property not exceeding Rs.50/- in value. The second regulation reconstituted the Sadar Court, making provision for the better administration of justice. The judicial system as modified by the Regulation of 1881-82 continued to exist in the Kanniyakumari district till 1956, when the District was merged with the Madras State and the judicial system obtaining in the Madras State was extended to the newly formed Kanniyakumari district.

Panchayat Courts:       In 1915, Panchayat Courts were newly

Constituted throughout the Travancore State by the enactment of the Travancore Village Panchayat Court Act. Section 7 of the Act provided for the appointment of a President and Judges for each Court for trying the cases filed before these courts. All civil suits on money or movable properties not exceeding Rs.50/- in value, were made cognisable by them. In certain cases, the monetary limit was raised to Rs.100/- and with the consent of both the contending parties, the courts could exercise jurisdiction upto Rs. 200/- The Panchayat Courts were mainly constituted to reduce the volume of pettyThe Presidents nnd Judges of the Village Panchayat Courts were invested with powers of the Honorary Magistrates under sub-section (i) of section 15 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1898 and the same was withdrawn, after the re-organisation of States. There were five Village Panchayat Courts in the Kanniyakumari District at the time of its merger with the Madras State in 1956. They were located at Nagercoil. Padmanabhapuram, Kuzhithurai, Colachel and Eraniel. There were ten judges and one President in the Panchayat Court at Nagercoil, Five Judges and one President in Panchayat Court at Padmanabhapuram, three Judges and one President in the Court at Kuzhithurai, and four Judges and one President each in Court at Colachel and Eraniel. The Judges and Presidents were appointed by the Government once in two years on the recommendation of the District Collector.

In 1956, at the time of the formation of the Kanniyakumari district , there were a District Court and two Additional District Courts at Nagercoil, exercising original and appellate jurisdiction. There was a Subordinate Judge Court at Padmanabhapuram, with original jurisdiction. There were also two Munsifs’ Courts each at Nagercoil, Padmanabhapuram and Kuzhithruai under the control of the District Court. These courts administered civil justice over well defined territorial limits. Thovala Taluk had no separate Munsifs Court. In 1959, due to pendency of suits, three temporary District Munsifs Courts, one each at Nagercoil, Padmanabhapuram and Kuzhithurai, were established; but they were abolished in the year 1960. The following Criminal Courts also existed in the District at the time of its merger with the Madras State in 1956:—

District Magistrate’s Court (Judicial), Trivandrum.

Sub-Divisional Magistrate’s Court, Padmanabhapuram.

First Class Magistrate’s Court, Nagercoil.

First Class Magistrate’s Court, Kuzhithurai,

Sub-Magistrate’s Court, Nagercoil,

Sub-Magistrate’s Court, Eraniel.

Sub-Magistrate’s Court, Mhoothapandi.

In 1957, two Additional District Courts at Nagercoil were replaced by two Subordinate Judges Courts at Nagercoil. One of these courts was abolished in April 1961. The Subordinate Judges Court at Padmanabhapuram which exorcised both original and appellate


jurisdiction in respect of only appeal cases transferred to that Court, was conferred in 1958 with powers to receive appeals, direct.

The territory constituted as the Kanniyakumari district under the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, though formed part of the Trivandrum district in Travancore and later in Travancore Cochin for Revenue purposes, was treated as a distinct Judicial District, having territorial jurisdiction over the four Tamil Taluks of Agasthiswaram, Thovala, Kalkulam and Vilavancode. The High Court which was the highest tribunal in the former Travancore State was situated in Trivandrum, the Capital City of the State. After the formation of Travancore- Cochin State, the High Court was shifted to Ernakulam and Trivandrum had a Bench of the High Court functioning there, which too, was discontinued after sometime. The Criminal Tribunals in this district consist in an ascending scale of the Courts of the Subordinate Magistrates, District Magistrate and the Sessions Court.

At the time of the Reorganisation of the State and the formation of the Kanniyakumari district, there were a District and Sessions Court and two Additional District and Sessions Courts at Nagercoil. The sessions cases committed to the sessions by the Subordinate Magistrates in the four Taluks were being tried mainly by the District and Sessions Judges and such of the cases that were transferred by him to the Additional District and Sessions Judges were tried by them. There were a District Magistrate’s Court at Trivandrum a Sub-Divisional Magistrate’s Court at Padmanabhapuram, two Stationary First Class Magistrate’s Courts at Kottar and Kuzhithurai and three Stationary Second Class Magistrate’s Court at Kottar, Bhoothapandy and Eraniel. Bench Magistrates’ Courts have been constituted which exercise either first class or second class powers according to the status of the Presiding Magistrate of the day at Nagercoil, Eraniel, Thuckalay and Kuzhithurai.

At present, a District and Sessions Court is functioning at Nagercoil. Besides this, three sub-courts are functioning one each at Nagercoil, Padmanabhapuram and Kuzhithurai. Further, the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court at Nagercoil, in the cadre of Sub-judge are also functioning. Subordinate judges are also Assistant Sessions Judges and they try cases committed to the Sessions by the Subordinate Magistrates in the district ^nd transferred to them by the District and Sessions Judge. After the establishment of the Chief Judicial Magistrate’s court at Nagercoil, the erstwhile First Class Magistrate’s Court at Nagercoil was abolished. The Chief Judicial Magistrate who was till 1974 called District Magistrate is

also Assistant Sessions Judge empowered to hear appeals against convictions by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Court at Padmanabhapuram has been substituted by a First Class Magistrate.

There are six permanent District Munsif Courts functioning as detailed below:-60

Principal District Munsifs Court, Nagercoil.

Additional District Munsif s Court, Nagercoil.

Principal District Munsifs Court, Padmanabhapuram.

Additional District Munsifs Court, Padmanabhapuram.

Principal District Munsifs Court, Kuzhithurai.

Additional District Muisifs Court, Kuzhithurai.

Appeals lie to the Sessions Court at Nagercoil against convictions by the First Class Magistrates’ Court in the district.

The offences tried by the various courts in the distrct are mainly offences under the Indian Penal Code and under the Madras Prohibition Act.

In tables 5 to 14 facts relating to Civil as well as Criminal are given with details such as number of cases filed and disposed of in the Magistrate and Sessions Courts, Criminal appeals instituted, disposed of and pending and fine imposed, and number of such appeals filed, disposed of and pending


Civil Courts Statistics TABLE – 5

Statement showing the number of suits (original and small cause) and appeals filed in the District.

Year    Original           Suits    Appeals

(V        (2)        (3)

1957 3148 909
1958 2716 967
1959 2626 803
1960 2639 2062
1961 5259 6428
1962 5338 6349
1963 4998 6051
1964 5318 6369
1965 5155 1041
1966 5329 6628
1967 6124 1277
1968 6291 1315
1969 9050 301
1970 8944 2333
1971 10610 1963
1972 9611 1962
1973 10257 2177
1974 9817 2064
1975 8114 2335
1976 3504 1930
1977 3175 896
1978 2283 538
1979 2855 1967
1980 2676 839



(2) (3)
1981 6613 2423
1982 7375 2012
1983 7839 1897
1984 9273 1556
1985 14731 1250
1986 2853 150
1987 3347 203



Statement showing the number of Suits Instituted Disposed of and Pending in the District Munsifs Court, Kanniyakumari District.

Ordinary Suits Small   Cause  Suits

(V Insti­tution(2) Disposedof(3) Pending(4) Insti­tution(5) Disposedof(6) Pending(7)
1957 2104 3153 2724 619 753 121
1958 1485 2998 1694 788 786 141
1959 1539 2661 1039 847 812 18$
1960 1644 2084 1225 765 852 11<
1961 1650 2158 1349 661 708 8;
1962 1681 2222 1548 680 654 10
1963 1736 2331 1938 689 720 9
1964 1831 2428 1610 759 708 15
1965 1763 2369 1625 725 781 11
1966 1885 2214 1971 761 710 18
1967 2162 2582 2179 853 944 13
1968 2287 2318 2730 749 728 1
1969 3187 2572 3936 777 788 1!


(V (2) (3) (4) (5) m
1970 2574 2813 4320 903 832 — _ y237
1971 2992 3826 4207 1016 1043 231
1972 2699 3784 3911 1025 1007 265
1973 2657 3821 3643 1036 1027 284
1974 2792 3236 4028 1012 991 330
1975 1769 2740 3606 307 379 275
1976 1548 2848 2826 533 455 386
1977 2013 3161 2400 524 649 243
1978 2259 3593 1881 330 503 80
1979 2567 2859 2389 307 289 110
1980 2077 2633 2560 232 312 39
1981 2312 2199 3440 182 141 83
1982 2467 2695 3843 369 231 228
1983 2455 2322 4538 237 259 209
1984 3137 2026 6016 313 247 276
1985 3193 2993 6650 327 387 224
1986 2603 2429 7251 342 281 291
1987 2995 2052 8695 176 208 259



Statement showing the number of Suits Instituted, Disposed of and Pending in the Courts of Subordinate Judges in Kanniyakumari District.

Ordinary Suits Small Cause Suits

Year                 —-

Insti- Disposed Pending Insti- Disposed pending tution of   tution of

(1)        (2)        (3)        (4)        (5)        (6)        (7)

82        223      199      28        8          20

58        160      48        173      166      27


(2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
59 82 44 167 164 30
67 93 61 162 162 34
75 113 77 75 103 77
61 112 69
83 115 73 ;— _
84 114 75             ■
77 104 79
101 79 125
84 94 142
128 100 191
145 106 252
176 167 294
215 268 298
225 256 342
241 183 368 ■ —
226 361 321
168 288 274
207 225 311
276 345 323 — •
340 431 316 — ■ . —
409 480 353 . —
362 419 410
189 219 158
139 103 _
228 252 206
274 334 236 _
212 254 280
248 216 435
339 194 630



Statement showing the number of Regular Appe Disposed of and Pending m the courts of Kanniyakumari Dl

Year(1) Institution(2) offices(3)
1957 700 1031
1958 891 1374
1959 709 1052
1960 793 949
1961 589 597
1962 442 500
1963 522 490
1964 420 530
1965 512 317
1966 500 345
1967 438 325
1968 457 392
1969 470 362
1970 538 366
1971 612 615
1972 617 465
1973 584 532
1974 556 519
1975 535 454
1976 914 653
1977 728 789
1978 846 782
1979 583 830
1980 565 835
1981 426 7/60



(V (2) (3) (4)
1982 520 701 1075
1983 559 667 1063
1984 299 566 841
1985 223 361 762
1986 150 203 757
1987 203 201 778



Statement showing the number of miscellaneous appeals instituted disposed of and pending in the Courts of Kanniyakumari District.

Year(1) Instituted(2) Disposal(3) Pending(4)
1957 116 212 17
1958 86 94 11
1959 92 83 22
1960 59 69 16
1961 171 157 30
1962 161 171 23
1963 189 187 24
1964 149 173 13
1965 158 89 85
1966 141 67 47
1967 141 251 149
1968 124 151 23
1969 136 112 43
1970 140 110 76
1971 210 235 93
1972 229 189 142


Criminal Court Statistic

Statement showing the relative conlfibutionf  Magistrate and Sessions Court to the aggregate Jtmt Kanniyakumari District

Year    No,      of         cases    before  appeal  cmm aw

the courts        appm

(1)        (2)        (3)        ftl

1968 14243 208 14451
1969 16904 169 17073
1970 18321 223 18544
1971 15681 235 15916
1972 14187 213 14400
1973 15128 283 15411
1974 20924 315 21239
1975 24521 452 24973
1976 28505 445 28960
1977 25048 494 25542
1978 17059 504 17563
1979 13289 606 13895
1980 11756 382 12391
1981 12992 4^8 13374
  • 14253
442 14701
1983 19239 674 19681
1984 18810 777 19484
1985 19456 20233
1986 23887 108 23995
1987 23547 94 23641



Statement showing the amounts of fine imposed realised and paid as compensation in Judicial Magistrates and Court of Sessions Kanniyakumari District.

Amount of      Amount           of         Amount           paid     as

Year    fine imposed   fine realised Compensation

jv         m         m

Not available

89084  66634  860

77782  76969  1400


(1)        (2)        (3)

5380    107618


61        Not      available



209028            204215

175779            171108

181221            179152

187549            185605

242848            231554

267922            268314

304576            304523

260347            260092

203397            199116

260269            243370

375133            342484

493866            486275

584263            591818

564141            559182

448519            405044

561580            375100

361023            255533

428602            267654

467059            324370

719320            368090

743870            387832

723730            579715

138675            80450

98725  72075



Number of Criminal Appeals instituted, disposed of and pending in the Sessions Court – Kanniyakumari District.

Year    Instituted        No.      of         Appeals           Pending


(V        (2)        (3)        (4)

(1) (2) (3) Iljsr
1982 227 137 207
1983 157 151 158
1984 343 130 376
1985 248 162 438
1986 265 167 424
1987 194 157 374
Statement showing the number of cases received, disposed of and
pending in the Sessions Court – Kanniyakumari District.
Received by
Year Commitment (or) Disposed Pending
on reference of Trial
( V (2) (3) (4)
1958 24 21 5
1959 33 35 3
1960 31 32 3
1961 Not available
1962 -Do-
1963 -Do-
1964 . 23 18
1965 39 21 7
1966 30 25 1
1967 40 33 1
1968 34 33 2
1969 41 40 1
1970 46 38 8
1971 53 47 6
1972 58 34 24


(V (2) (3) m
1973 44 57 6
1974 60 57 10
1975 42 45 5
1976 30 25 5
1977 52 29 9
1978 28 44 6
1979 67 36 14
1980 82 45 23
1981 109 67 31
1982 126 77 33
1983 256 104 82
1984 158 94 83
1985 74 83 70
1986 89 46 23
1987 134 55 34
TABLE - 14
Statement showing the number of Criminal appeals instituted and disposed of and pending, in the court of District Judicial Magistrate, Kanniyakumari District.
Year Instituted Disposed of Pending
(1) (2) (3) (4)


1964 155 135
1965 139 108
1966 104 97
1967 88 107
1968 112 98
1969 99 57

Leave a Reply

© 2017 My CMS · Subscribe: · Website designed by GM Software
XSLT by CarLake