Kerala Court January 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
State of Kerala and ors. Vs. Abdul Sathar P. and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Ker193
Cyriac Joseph, J.1. This appeal is filed against the judgment dated 10-12-2003 in W.P. (C) No. 38965 of 2003. The respondents in the writ petition are the appellants herein and the petitioner in the writ petition is the first respondent herein. The second respondent herein got himself impleaded as additional respondent No. 2 in the writ appeal.2. According to the averments in the writ petition, the petitioner (1st respondent herein) is the Secretary of the Diamond Arts and Sports Club, Cherur in Malappuram District. The said club is registered under the Societies Registration Act and its Registration No. is 412/89. The club was formed and promoted by the youngesters in the locality with a view to strengthen social welfare movement. The club has convened several sports and cultural events the income from which has been utilised for the well being of the Society. The first venture of the club was to construct a play ground for the G.M.U.P. School, Cherur. A play ground having 60 mtr. len...
State of Kerala Vs. Soma Thomas
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: III(2004)BC421; 2004CriLJ2222; 2004(2)KLT112
Cyriac Joseph, J.1. This appeal filed by the State of Kerala and others is against the judgment dated 30th June, 2003 in W.P.(c) No. 17452/2003 which was filed by Mrs. Soma Thomas, the Respondent herein. The appellants were the respondents in the said Writ Petition.2. The respondent-Mrs. Soma Thomas is the wife of Sri. P.T. Thomas who is undergoing imprisonment in Central Prison, Viyyur as he was convicted and sentenced for offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. She filed Ext. P1 application dated 19.11.2002 before the State Government under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for remission of the sentence of her husband. Alleging that there was delay on the part of the Government in considering Ext.P1 application, she filed the Writ Petition praying for a direction to the first respondent - State of Kerala to consider and dispose of Ext.P1 application without delay. The learned Single Judge disposed of the Writ Petition at the admission s...
Kanthimathy Plantations (P) Ltd. and ors. Vs. S. Veera Subramonia Sarm ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: [2006]129CompCas406(Ker); (2004)2CompLJ183(Ker); [2004]54SCL360(Ker)
J.B. Koshy, J.1. This appeal is filed against the order of the Company Law Board in a petition filed under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956. In this judgment, the parties are referred to as per the ranking in the company petition filed before the Company Law Board. Appellants in this case are respondents 1 and 2 in the above company petition. First respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'Kanthimathy company') is the company whose affairs are the subject matter of the company petition. The abovesaid company owned plantations and controlling shares in respondents 5 and 6 companies. Petitioners and the appellants herein belong to the same , family of late S. Sivaramkrishna Iyer. Appellant company as well as respondents 5 to 6 companies were acquired by late Sivaramkrishna Iyer. Petitioners 1 to 5 and second respondent are children of Sivaramkrishna Iyer. 7th petitioner is the wife of the second petitioner and other petitioners are grandchildren. Respondents 3 and 4 were the...
Jacob and ors. Vs. K.T. Mohammed and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-15-2004
Reported in: II(2004)ACC243
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Can the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court calculate compensation in a different method than that is provided under the Second Schedule, when claims are filed under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short 'the Act'). Facts of the case are not disputed.2. A youngster at the age of 28 died in a motor vehicle accident on 27.5.1997 when a tempo van having Reg. No. KL-10/B1017 driven by the second respondent hit the motor cycle rid en by the deceased. The parents, brothers and sisters filed a claim for compensation under Section 163(A) of the Act against the owner, driver and the insurer of the tempo van alleging negligence on the part of the driver of the tempo van. The above was numbered as OP. (MV) No. 544/97 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (sic). The owner and the driver (first and second respondents) did not appear before the Tribunal and they were declared ex parte. The Insurance Company obtained permission under Sect...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Veena
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-14-2004
Reported in: II(2004)ACC362; 2004ACJ1492; 2004(1)KLT869
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Insurance company is the appellant herein. It challenges the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kasaragod in O.P.(MV) No. 226 of 1994 insofaras it covered compensation amount under the Workmen's Compensation Act in a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Respondents 1 to 4 are the legal representatives of a driver who lost his life in a motor vehicle accident. While the deceased was driving the vehicle, bearing No. KL-14/4399, owned by the fifth respondent and insured by the appellant insurance company, it collided with another stage carriage vehicle, CNO 9172. The Tribunal found that the accident happened due to the negligence of both drivers and 50% liability was cast on both drivers. The Tribunal calculated a total compensation of Rs. 2,80,000/- and directed the owner and insurance company of the vehicle, bearing No. CNO9172 to pay 50% of the above amount. The Tribunal held that the owner of the vehicle KL-14/4399 is not liable to pay comp...
Rajappan Vs. Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Science and Tec ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-14-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)KLT157
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioner is the father of a patient who died in the course of treatment in the respondent-Medical Institution which is a statutory corporation created by the Government of Kerala for Medical Research and Treatment. The petitioner's daughter was admitted in the hospital for epilepsy. The patient was admitted on 3.4.2003 and died on 17.4.2003. After the death of petitioner's daughter, the petitioner applied for medical records pertaining to the treatment of his daughter. The husband of the deceased however was given case summary and discharge record and investigation report by the respondent-Hospital. Therefore the petitioner's request for copies of medical records was declined.2. I heard counsel for the petitioner and standing counsel appearing for the respondents. While the petitioner maintains the stand that petitioner is entitled to a statement from the doctor concerned in the form of Appendix 3 under Regulation 1.3.1 of the Indian Medical Council (...
State Bank of Travancore Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-12-2004
Reported in: [2005]142STC266(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. In all these writ petitions the sole question that arises for consideration is as to whether the State of Kerala has got any priority in the matter of recovery of the sales tax dues from the defaulters over the equitable mortgages created by such defaulters earlier in favour of the petitioner-banks.2. Writ Petition Nos. 24528 of 2000, 2082 of 2002, 23634 of 2003 and 36608 of 2003 are filed by the State Bank of Travancore, Writ Petition No. 36313 of 2000 is filed by the Vijaya Bank, Writ Petition No. 8855 of 2003 is filed by the Alleppey District Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Writ Petition No. 33352 of 2003 is filed by the Allahabad Bank.3. Though facts of individual cases have not much relevance so far as the question mentioned above, the facts may be briefly stated: In O.P. No. 24528 of 2000 filed by the State Bank of Travancore, the third respondent, a public limited company, availed loan to the tune of Rs. 60 lakhs during 1985 and 1986, inter alia, pledging the machi...
Mar Appraem Kuri Co. Ltd. Vs. Dix
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)KLT678
ORDERK.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Does the limitation on the right of the landlord against splitting up of the unity and integrity of the tenancy, inhering in the inhibitions of his own contract, visits the assignee of the part of the reservation is the interesting question that has come up for consideration in this case.2. It is trite law that a landlord cannot split up the unity and integrity of the tenancy and recover possession of a part of the demised premises from the tenant. Law is well settled that where there is a single indivisible contract of tenancy it cannot be split up by a court unless there is statutory provision to that effect or by a contract between the parties. Alienatio rei praefertur juri accrescendi, means, alienation is favoured by law rather than accumulation and the assignee is clothed with all the rights and liabilities of the assignor. Section 109 of the Transfer of Property Act however, provides a statutory exception to this rule and enables an assignee of a pa...
Leela Vs. Registrar, High Court of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)KLT451
Kurian Joseph, J.1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to seniority over respondents 3 to 11 is the issue to be decided in this Original Petition. The petitioner joined Government service on 8.2.1982 as L.D. Clerk in the Kerala Judicial Ministerial Subordinate Service. The recruitment was through the Public Service Commission. As per Ext. P1 proceedings of the first respondent, she was appointed as Assistant Grade II 'for a period of 180 days or till vacancy expires whichever is earlier' in the Kerala High Court Service. The appointment was under Rule 17(a) of the Kerala High Court Service Rules. Thereafter she was appointed on a regular basis in the High Court service with effect from 28.12.1987. As per Ext. P3 proceedings dated 25.11.1989 the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Grade I retrospectively from 24.11.1998, reverted for want of vacancy with effect from 7.3.1989 and again appointed as Assistant Grade I with effect from 25.5.1989. It was clarified as per Ext. P4 that the a...
Shajil Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)KLT553
M. Ramachandran, J.1. The point that has come up for consideration, is as to whether the select list of Lecturers in Instrument Technology, Government Polytechnics, prepared for promotion to the category of Head of Section, is in conformity with law. The petitioner and the fourth respondent are at present working as Lecturers in Instrument Technology. They had been appointed on the same day. By virtue of his higher rank and advice by the Public Service Commission, the fourth respondent had always been considered as senior to the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner had been taking effort for a promotion. The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Ext. P2 judgment in O.P. No. 34044 of 2000, when he had challenged the steps for filling up of the vacancy by direct recruitment. The Original Petition filed as above had been disposed of by this Court by observing that at the time when the vacancy arose in 1995 there were no qualified hands for promotion available and therefore st...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »