Kerala Court July 2002 Judgments
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ajith
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-31-2002
Reported in: 2003ACJ352
K.A. Mohamed Shafi, J. 1. The 3rd respondent, insurer in O.R (MV) 662 of 1992 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pathanamthitta is the appellant. The award dated 2.1.1999 is under challenge.2. The respondents 1 and 2 herein, the claimants before the MACT claimed a compensation of Rs. 2,03,000/- for the death of their 4 year old daughter, Neethu, in a Motor Accident. Originally, the claim was for Rs. 1,03,000/- and subsequently, by amending the petition, they made enhanced claim of Rs. 2,03,000/-.3. The fact that Neethu, the 4 year old child of the respondents 1 and 2, studying in the U.K.G. Class met with a road accident on 3.2.1992 at about 3.40 P.M. and shesuccumbed to injuries at 8.30 P.M. while undergoing treatment in the Medical Mission Hospital, Thiruvalla is not in dispute. The driver and the owner of the offending lorry who were respondents 1 and 2 before the Tribunal did not contest. The 3rd respondent, insurer alone contested. After enquiry, the Learned Tribu...
Tag this Judgment!Sukumaran Vs. K.S.R.T.C.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-29-2002
Reported in: [2003]115CompCas695(Ker)
Cyriac Joseph, J.1. This Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment in O.P. No. 6840/02 which was disposed of by the learned Single Judge without granting the reliefs claimed in the Original Petition. The appellant herein is the petitioner in the Original Petition.2. The appellant is employed as Coach Builder in the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. He stood as surety for loans taken by a few persons from the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. As per the agreements executed between the appellant and the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd., the appellant agreed that in case of default of payment of monthly instalments by the principal debtor, recovery of such amounts as may be fixed by the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. could be made from the salary of the appellant at source and also from his terminal and other benefits.3. Consequent on default made by the four principal debtors for whom the appellant had stood as surety, the Kerala State Financial Enterprises L...
Tag this Judgment!Assistant Secretary (Law), Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Revenue ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-29-2002
Reported in: [2003]129STC303(Ker)
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. The above T.R.C. is filed against the order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Ernakulam, in T.A. No. 965 of 1991. Revenue has filed this revision under Section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. Assessee in this case has filed return. In the assessment in question the assessing authority levied turnover tax on Rs. 48,29,120. This was questioned in appeal. But the appeal was dismissed. The point raised in the appeal was whether the levy of turnover tax on Rs. 48,29,120 under commission sales is justified or not ?2. The assessee has effected sales for Rs. 48,562.50 through commission agent 'Senthil Trading Company, Kozhikode', who is a registered dealer under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. The agent collected tax on the turnover and paid it to the Assistant Commissioner, Special Circle, Kozhikode. A certificate to that effect was issued by the agent. The sale was taxable as the first sale but exempted from the turnove...
Tag this Judgment!Musthafa Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALT(Cri)527; 2002(84)ECC278
M.R. Hariharan Nair, J.1. The appellant has raised before Court a novel question based on the provisions of the NDPS (Amendment) Act 9 of 2001. The contention is that the conviction contemplated in Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, as it stands amended now, violates Article 20 of the Constitution of India as far as pre-amendment accusations are concerned.2. It is pointed out that under the law as it stood on 25.10.2000 which is the date of occurrence in this case, for possession of ganja in question the appellant was liable for punishment with imprisonment which could extend only upto 5 years and fine which could extend only upto Rs. 50,000/-, where as by application of Section 20(b)(ii)(B) as contemplated in Section 41 of the Amendment Act 9 of 2001, the offence would get converted to one attracting imprisonment which could extend upto 10 years and fine which could extend uptp Rs. 1 !akh. The contention is that notwithstanding the further provision in Section 41 of the Amendment A...
Tag this Judgment!Mymoona Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALT(Cri)435; 2003(85)ECC262
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. This writ of Habeas Corpus has been preferred by the wife of the detenu who was detained under Sections 3(1)(iii) and 3(1)(iv) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). Ext. P1 order of detention dated 4.10.2001 and the subsequent order, Ext. P6, dated 21.1.2002 confirming the order of detention are under challenge in this writ petition.2. Detenu by name P. Kunhimohammed was intercepted on 18.8.2001 by the Customs Authorities while he was travelling in a passenger train bound for Coimbatore. Detenu was searched by the Special Customs Preventive Unit, Kannur in the presence of two witnesses. During the search 31 gold biscuits of foreign origin weighing 3,611 grams and valued at Rs. 16,28,786/- along with Indian currency of Rs. 11,800/- were recovered from his person. Gold was found concealed around his waist. Statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act was taken wherein detenu stat...
Tag this Judgment!K. Kunhaman @ Kunhiraman Vs. State of Kerala Represented by C.i. of Po ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-25-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ245
Radhakrishnan, J.1. This is an unfortunate case where a fourteen yearold girl had to depose that her father had killed hermother and also the brother of the accused deposing of theextra judicial confession made by the accused.Unfortunate girl lost her mother and had the misfortune tosee her father punished for imprisonment for life.2. Prosecution case is that on 9.7.1997 at about10.30 A.M. accused killed his wife Bhargavi by hittingher with a granite stone on the head and face. It was ona bandh day. P.W. 16 Sub Inspector of Police, Rajapuramwent to the place of occurrence, the courtyard of housenumber K.B.P. II-355 of Kodam Village which belonged tothe accused and recorded Ext. P1 F.I. statement given byP.W.1, neighbour of the accused. P.W. 17 C.I. of Police,Vellarikundu conducted investigation and filed the chargeagainst the accused under Section 302 I.P.C. before theJudicial First Class Magistrate, Hosdrug and theMagistrate committed the case to Sessions Court, Kasargod.3. On the sid...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Rahiman Musaliar Vs. Muhammed Sahib
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-25-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Ker84
ORDERP.R. Raman, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S. No. 764/92 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Palakkad is the petitioner in C.R.P. No. 921/2001 filed against the order in I.A. No. 1300/2001. He is also the appellant in C.M.A. No. 15/2002. Whereas the defendants 2 and 3 in the said suit are the petitioners 1 and 2 in C.R.P. No. 914/2001 filed against the order in I.A. No. 1427/2001. They are also the appellants in C.M.A. No. 16/2002. The brief facts are as follows:-2. The plaintiff instituted the suit before the Munsiff's Court, Palakkad claiming himself to be the Mutawalli of Palakkad Manjakkulam Mosque Jaram. The plaint allegation is that Manjakkulam Palli Jaram is an ancient Muslim Mosque where one Sayeed Khaja Hussain, who was a divine person breathed his last in the said place and a Jaram was constructed and the family of the plaintiff constructed a Mosque and managed the affairs. The senior most member of the Arakkal family was in successful management of this private Wakf. Public us...
Tag this Judgment!Aysha Vs. Sub Registrar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-24-2002
Reported in: I(2003)DMC50
K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J. 1. According to the petitioner she is the legally wedded wife of the 2nd respondent. Their marriage had been solemnised under Muslim Law. The second respondent married another. That was based on an agreement entered into between them and registered with the office of the first respondent. Such a document has been registered as a miscellaneous document to be entered into book No. 4 maintained under Section 51 of the Indian Registration Act by the first respondent. The petitioner applied for a copy of the said agreement. The petitioner is not provided with a certified copy. Therefore the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the first respondent to issue a certified copy of the said document to the petitioner so that she can proceed further to vindicate her grievance.2. Delivery of certified copy is covered by Section 57 of the Registration Act, 1908. Document entered in book No. 4 is covered by Section 57(3). The petitioner is not a person who...
Tag this Judgment!Sainaba Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-24-2002
Reported in: 2003(86)ECC617; 2003(1)KLT236
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. This writ of Habeas Corpus has been preferred by the wife of V. Haris, the detenu. He has been detained in the Central Prison under Sections 3(1)(iii) and 3(1)(iv) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter called as COFEPOSA Act).2. Petitioner challenges the detention order dated 18th October, 2001 as well as the order dated 18th January, 2002 confirming the order of detention. The case of the respondent State is that the detenu was intercepted on 17th August, 2001 while he was travelling in a bus near Sales Tax Check Post, Manjeswaram and 34 gold biscuits of foreign origin, weighing 3,961 grams and valued at Rs. 17,42,840 was recovered from this person and seized under a mahazar drawn on 18th August, 2001. He was arrested on 18th August, 2001 and was remanded to judicial custody. He was later granted bail by order dated 25th September, 2001. Government of Kerala issued detention order dated 18th Octob...
Tag this Judgment!Kuttan Nadar Wilson Vs. State, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Cou ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-24-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALT(Cri)543
1. The appellant was the accused in S.C. No. 103/89 of the Sessions Court, Kollam, and he has been convicted for the offence under Sections 489-B and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and three years respectively for the two offences.2. The prosecution case was that at about 2 p.m. on 20-6-1983, the accused went over to the shop of P.W. 1 and after purchasing four Thoshiba Anand batteries worth Rs. 13.20 from the shop, tendered a 100 rupee note, the genuineness of which P.W. 1 suspected. The accused immediately tried to get back the currency note. In the meantime, P.W. 3 - Sub Inspector of Police, who was going along the road, noticed a commotion in front of the shop and he caught hold of the accused straightaway and after preparing a mahazar, took him to the Police Station and registered the case.3. Shri S. Gopakumaran Nair, who appeared for the appellant, submitted that even accepting the version of P.W. 1, there is no suffic...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »