Kerala Court October 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.
Subbaya Bai Vs. Karunakaran Nambiar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-29-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Ker72; 2005(1)KLT206; [2006]69SCL33(Ker)
J.B. Koshy, J.1. The issue to be decided in this case is the power of State Government in nominating Directors in the Board of Multi-State Co-operative Societies Under Section 48 of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 (Act 39 of 2002) (hereinafter referred to as 'the 2002 Act'), vis-a-vis the power of nomination by the Central and State Governments as per the bye-laws. The Central Areacanut and Coco Marketing and Processing Cooperative Ltd., properly known as CAMP CO Ltd. is a Multi-State Co-operative Society. The bye-laws of the society were framed in conformity with the provisions of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 1984 (Act 51 of 1984) (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1984 Act'). The State Governments of Kerala and Karnataka have subscribed to the share capital of the second respondent society. Clause 16 of bye-laws of the society provides the constitution of the Board of Directors of the society. The total members of the Board is 19. As per Clause 16(1)(c) ...
Abdul Rasheed Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-29-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)KLT5
Pius C. Kuriakose, J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to quash Ext.P3 order by which the application filed by the petitioner under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act has been rejected by the Land Acquisition Officer-3rd respondent on the ground of limitation. The petitioner filed Ext.P2 application relying on the judgment in L.A.R.No.85 of 1994 of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Mavelikkara which pertained to another property covered by the Section 4(1) notification under which the petitioner's property was also acquired. The Subordinate Judge's Court, Mavelikkara pronounced the judgment in L.A.R. No. 85 of 1994 on 12.4.2002, the day on which that Court was closed for midsummer vacation. The Mavelikkara Sub Court was having midsummer vacation by virtue of a notification issued by the High Court under Section 19 of the Civil Courts Act till 25.5.2002. The petitioner applied for certified copy of the judgment in L.A.R. No. 85 of 1994 on 25.5.2002 itself and did not waste ...
Mohankumar Vs. Guruvayur Devaswom Board
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-29-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)KLT423
S. Sankarasubban, J.1. Petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 24310 of 2004 is the Guruvayoor Devaswom Employees Congress. According to the petitioner, it is a registered union of the employees. The Sree Krishna College, Guruvayoor, which is an aided private collage affiliated to the University of Calicut, is under the management of the Guruvayoor Devaswom Board. In all the educational institutions managed by the Board, the children of the employees of the Board are given preference for admission under the management quota. After giving admission to the children of the employees, if there are seats available in the management quota, those are filled up from outside. This practice is in vogue for the past several years.2. In the Board meeting held on 14.5.2004, it was decided to collect Rs. 1,500/- towards Development Fund from all students who are given admissions in the staff quota for plus one, degree and postgraduate courses for the academic year 2004-05. According to the petitioner, it was also...
Sudhakaran Vs. University of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-29-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)KLT133
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The University of Kerala published Ext.P1 Notification dated 22nd November, 1999 inviting applications for appointment to the plan posts in the Departments of Environmental Sciences, Bio-Technology, Computer Science and Opto-Electronics in the University. It is stated therein that the appointments to the posts will be made in accordance with Section 6 Sub-section (2) of Chapter II of the Kerala University Act, 1974. The principles that would be followed as regards the turn of appointment and communal rotation are also stated therein. The last date fixed for submission of completed applications was 10th January, 2000.2. Respondents 3 to 5 and the petitioners were among those who applied for being considered for appointment to the posts of Lecturers in Environmental Sciences. On scrutiny of the applications, they were found eligible for being considered and were interviewed along with other candidates on the 17th and 18th of July, 2001.3. Respondents 3 t...
Rasheed Vs. Tahsildar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-28-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)KLT945
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioners are challenging Ext.P5 series of demands and Ext.P6 detailed order of assessment demanding building tax in respect of a building from four joint owners. Even though statutory appeal is provided, the petitioners did not choose to file appeal but contested the assessment by filing O.P. in 1999. The O.P. having been admitted 5 years back, I do not think it is fair on the part of this Court to reject the case for pursuing statutory remedy. Therefore I proceed to decide the case on merits. I heard counsel for the petitioners and the Government Pleader and have gone through the impugned order Ext.P6.2. The contention raised by the petitioners is that the petitioners shared the cost of construction of the building and the buildings are to be assessed as separate units in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 2(e) of the Kerala Building Tax Act which is as follows:'S.2(e) 'building' means a house, out-house, garage or any other structure or part thereof...
Achuthan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-28-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)KLT912
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. What is the procedure prescribed under law for the Ombudsman in exercising his power under Section 271 P of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 to order initiation of prosecution against the elected members or officers in a Panchayat? Section 271 P reads as follows:--'271 P. Initiation of Prosecution.-- (1) If. after an investigation of inquiry, the Ombudsman finds that there is a prima facie case against the accused, .involving a criminal offence, the Ombudsman may refer, the complaint and the findings to a competent, authority with recommendation to initiate prosecution.(2) The authority responsible, for initiating such prosecution shall conduct a detailed enquiry if necessary and charge a case'.2. A reading of Section 271 P would show that (I) the Ombudsman has to conduct an investigation or enquiry, (2) he has to enter a finding that there is a prima facie case against the accused involving a criminal offence, (3) for that purpose the accused should be on th...
CochIn Naval Base Civilian Employees Co-operative Society Vs. Rajan Ku ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-28-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Ker46; 2004(3)KLT885
R. Bhaskaran, J. 1. A.S. No. 213of 1992 is filed by the plaintiff in O.S. No. 91 of 1988 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Cherthala and A.S. No. 289 of 1995 is filed by the defendants in O.S. No. 92 of 1988 on the file of the same Court. The two suits were filed by the same plaintiff, Cochin Naval Base Civil Employees Co-operative Society. The relief prayed for in O.S. No. 91 of 1988 was to declare the settlement deed executed by the 1st defendant in favour of the 2nd defendant as null and void and not affecting the right of the plaintiff to realise the amounts decreed in favour of the plaintiff by proceeding against the plaint schedule property. 2. In O.S. No. 91 of 1988 the plaintiff contended that defendants 1 and 2 are husband and wife and are residing together. The 1st defendant as the member of the Director Board of the plaintiff-society incurred liability as per the award passed by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies in A.R.C. No. 66 of 1970 to the ext...
Kuttappan Achari Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-28-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)KLT273
R. Bhaskaran, J.1. This appeal is filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No. 570 of 1987 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge's Court, Kottayam. The suit was for declaration of title over plaint schedule movables and recovery of possession of the same from the 3rd defendant or for realisation of its present value from defendants 1 and 2.2. The plaintiff is the Proprietor of Govinda Jewellery, Kayamkulam. He is also an active member of the All Kerala Gold and Silver Merchants Association. It is stated in the plaint that on 18.9.1981 he was taken into custody by the 2nd defendant from his business premises without any arrest warrant. It is also stated that the moment the plaintiff entered in the Changanacherry Police Station the 2nd defendant without even putting a question slapped the plaintiff on his checks with the palm of his hand and pointing to the 4th defendant behind the bar, threatened the plaintiff that his place also will be there unless the plaintiff would make available so...
Vijayakumaran Nair Vs. State Bank of Travancore
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-27-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)KLT953; (2005)IILLJ875Ker
K.K. Denesan, J.1. Petitioner was an Asst. Manager under the 1st respondent-Bank. He requested for voluntary retirement in 1993. Though Voluntary Retirement Pension Regulations were framed at that time, the same was not approved by the Government. Petitioner therefore submitted his resignation on 17.9.1993 which was accepted by the respondent-Bank on 15.12.1993. As the petitioner had resigned from the service of the Bank, the respondents took the stand that he was not entitled to any pension or other benefits applicable to officers who retire from service.2. Petitioner approached this Court by filing O.P.No. 15098 of 1994. Pending the above Writ Petition, he requested the Bank for payment of travelling allowance and privilege leave encashment. That request was rejected. Meanwhile the voluntary retirement scheme under the Pension Regulations was approved by the Government of India and those Regulations came into force. Relying on letter dated 24.2.1997 issued by the Indian Banks Associa...
K.O. Mathew and ors. Vs. Thomas and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-27-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Ker59
R. Bhaskaran, J.1. A.S. No. 225 of 1991 is filed by the plaintiff In O.S. No. 101 of 1985 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Thiruvanan thapurarn. He is also the, appellant in A.S. No, 6 of 1999 filed against the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 326 of 1986 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court Thiruvanan thapurm. Both the suits were tried jointly and a common judgment was passed by the trial Court. O.S. No. 101 of 1985 was treated as the leading case. O.S. No. 101 of 1.985 was filed by the appellant herein for specific performance and O.S. No. 326 of 1986 was filed in' respect of the same property by the 1st respondent in the appeal against the appellant and his wife for declaration of title and. for a mandatory injunction to vacate the premises and also directing the defendants to remove.the structures. That suit was in fact filed originally as O.S. No. 301 of 1984 before the Munsiffs, Court, Thiruvanan thapuram. and was transferred to be tried along with O.S. No. 10...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »