Kerala Court February 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.
E.S.i. Corporation Vs. Julier Sherly
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-2004
Reported in: II(2004)ACC343; 2004ACJ1747; [2004(101)FLR959]; 2004(1)KLT903; (2004)IILLJ665Ker
R. Rajendra Babu, J. 1. Whether one of the dependents of a deceased insured workman is entitled to the full rate of dependant benefits in the absence of any other dependant is the question involved in this case.2. The wife, daughter and mother of a deceased employee covered under the E.S.I. Act filed I.C.51/1999 before the E.I. Court, Alappuzha, for declaration that the death of the employee was as a result of an employment injury and that they were entitled to the dependents benefits under the E.S.I. Rules. The E.I. Court declared that the death of the employee was due to the employment injury and the dependents were entitled to the dependents benefits. Accordingly, dependant benefits were awarded to the widow, son and daughter of the deceased. Later it was found that the son was not eligible for the dependant benefits as he was found above the age of 18. The daughter of the deceased workman got married on 20.5.2000 and thereby she was also disentitled to the benefits. The widowed mot...
Thankachan Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)KLT967
Kurian Joseph, J.1. Petitioner is aggrieved by the discontinuance of disability pension. Petitioner was enrolled in the Army on 5.2.1962 as a Recruit. Suffering from Central Choroiditis (both eyes) and Duodenal Ulcer petitioner was discharged from the service on 31.3.1986. Respondents have a case that the petitioner had already reached the normal term of retirement. However, the fact that he had the disability at the time of discharge is not disputed. It is seen from the counter affidavit that the petitioner had been undergoing treatment since June, 1983 when he was placed under the Medical Category BEE (Temporary). After two periods of such temporary placement, he was placed under Medical Category BEE (Permanent) with effect from 28.12.1984 as per Ext.R4(c). Thereafter he developed Duodenal Ulcer since November, 1985. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the Release Medical Board had assessed 60% composite disability at the time of discharge as per Ext.R4(d). The Chief Controlle...
John Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)KLT88
K. Balakrishnan Nair, J.1. The petitioners challenge two orders of the Government, granting exemption from the operation of certain provisions of the Kerala Building Rules and also the building permit granted oh the basis of those orders in favour of respondents 5 and 6. The brief facts of the case are the following:2. The petitioners are the tenants of a building jointly owned by respondents 5 and 6. The said respondents have filed Rent Control Petitions against them and other tenants for eviction under Section 11(4)(iii) and (iv) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control Act, 1965. Ext. P1 is the Rent Control Petition filed against the 1st petitioner, to which he has filed Ext. P2 objection. A Photostat copy of the building permit obtained by the landlords was produced alongwith the Rent Control Petition, as evident from the list of documents in Ext. P1. The petitioners submit, the copy of the permit was not served on them. When the case was listed for trial, the copy of the bu...
C.K. Sunny Vs. Additional Sales Tax Officer-i, Sales Tax Office
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-10-2004
Reported in: [2005]139STC186(Ker)
G. Sivarajan, J.1. Petitioner is a dealer in raw rubber. He is an assessee to sales tax both under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and under the Central Sales Tax Act. He is presently aggrieved by the assessment orders (exhibits P13 and P14) passed by the respondent for the period from April to July, 2003. According to the petitioner the said orders are passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. It is contended that the petitioner filed monthly returns for the period from April to July, 2003 and the assessing authority by invoking rule 21(9) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules, 1963 sought to reject the monthly returns and to make assessments on the allegation of clandestine transactions revealed on enquires. It is stated that the petitioner, on receipt of the pre-assessment notices dated October 9, 2003 (exhibits PI and P2) had submitted objections dated October 29, 2003 (exhibits P3 and P4) seeking for the supply of the documents obtained on enquiry to file de...
Salim Vs. Thomas
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-06-2004
Reported in: I(2005)BC41; 2004(1)KLT816; [2004]52SCL293(Ker)
R. Basant, J.1. Does a cheque issued after the date of closure of the account fall within the sweep of Section 138 of the N.I. Act? This is the question of law thrown up for consideration in this appeal against an appellate judgment of acquittal.2. Fundamental facts are not in dispute. The cheque in question is Ext.P1. It is dated 23.12.1991. It was dishonoured on 21.1.1992. The account on which the cheque was drawn was closed by the accused long earlier - on 30.1.1990. The cheque was dishonoured on the ground that the account was closed. Signature in the cheque is admitted. The accused contended that the cheque was not issued for the due discharge of any legally enforceable debt/liability to the complainant. It was issued to another person - one Vijayan by name. The obvious suggestion was that the undated cheque handed over to the said Vijayan as security was being misused by the complainant.3. P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exts.P1 to P6 were marked. On the side of the accused D.Ws.1 ...
P.N. Salim Vs. P.J. Thomas and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-06-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)23; II(2006)BC337; [2005]127CompCas894(Ker); 2004CriLJ3096
ORDERR. Basant, J.1. Does a cheque issued after the date of closure of the account fall within the sweep of Section 138 of the N.I. Act? This is the question of law thrown up for consideration in this appeal against an appellate judgment of acquittal.2. Fundamental facts are not in dispute. The cheque in question is Ext. PI. It is dated 23-12-1991. It was dishonoured on 21-1-1992. The account on which the cheque was drawn was closed by the accused long earlier -- on 30-1-1990. The cheque was dishonoured on the ground that the account was closed. Signature in the cheque is admitted. The accused contended that the cheque was not issued for the due discharge of any legally enforceable debt/liability to the complainant. It was issued to another person -- one Vijayan by name. The obvious suggestion was that the undated cheque handed over to the said Vijayan as security was being misused by the complainant.3. P. Ws. 1 to 3 were examined and Exts. PI to P6 were marked. On the side of the accu...
Parukutty Amma Vs. Thankam Amma
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-05-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)KLT991
R. Bhaskaran, J.1. This second appeal is filed by defendants 1 and 3 in a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction and damages. The trial court granted a decree restraining the defendants from cutting or selling any tree from the plaint schedule properties and also from demolishing the house and also from committing waste. An amount of Rs. 6,850/- was awarded as damages. The appellate Court confirmed the judgment and decree of the trial court.2. The substantial questions of law formulated on which notice was ordered read as follows:(A) Were the Courts below justified in relying on Ext.C4 report of the Finger Print Expert alone to grant a decree in favour of the plaintiff?(B) Without examining the Finger Print Expert, can the report filed by him be relied on, when serious objections are raised against the report of the Finger Print Expert?(C) Were the courts below justified in not comparing the disputed thumb impression with the specimen thumb impression to arrive at a conclusion wheth...
North Malabar GramIn Bank Officers' Association and Anr. Vs. Reserve B ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-05-2004
Reported in: (2005)ILLJ229Ker
ORDERR. Rajendra Babu, J.1. The common question for consideration in all these Original Petitions was whether the employer was entitled to discontinue from the remittance of the provident fund contributions in excess of the rate prescribed by law, when the employer was contributing in excess of the statutory limits on the basis of the joint application filed by the employer and employees before the Provident Fund Authorities.2. O.P. Nos. 13968/2001 and 14011/2001 were filed by the North Malabar Gramin Bank Officers' Association and the North Malabar Gramin Bank Employees' Association for quashing Exhibit P2 Circular issued by the North Malabar Gramin Bank directing the discontinuance of the payment of contributions in excess of the prescribed rate by the employer. O.P. Nos. 17647/2001 and 17994/2001 were filed by the South Malabar Gramin Bank Staff Association and the South Malabar Gramin Bank Officers Congress and also the Staff Union and others for quashing Exhibit P2 Circular for di...
George Issac Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-04-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)KLT752
ORDERG. Sasidharan, J. 1. Crl.M.C.4557/2003 is filed by the third accused and the other criminal miscellaneous case is filed by Accused Nos. 2 and 4 in Crime 654/2003 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam for quashing the first information report. The petitioner in Crl.M.C. 4557/2003 and the first petitioner in the other Crl.M.C. are partners in the partnership firm which runs Hotel Embassy in Ernakulam. The second petitioner in Crl.M.C. 4678/2003 is an employee in Hotel Embassy. Crime 654/2003 was registered in Central Police Station, Ernakulam under Section 55(a) and (i) of the Abkari Act. The allegation is that on 1.9.2003, a day on which the licensed premises for sale of liquor in respect of all the licences issued shall remain closed being the first day of an English calendar month, liquor was being sold in Room No. 27 in the first floor of Hotel Embassy and thereby petitioners committed offences under Section 55(a) and (i) of the Act. It is stated that there was F.L.3 licence issu...
Amina Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-04-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)KLT657
M. Ramachandran, J.1. The management of M.S.M. College, Kayamkulam had requested the Government that two teaching posts in the Department of Zoology were to be sanctioned as duly admissible. The teachers already started to work, in anticipation of such sanction. By Ext. P9 Government Order dated 9.5.2003, the management, however, had been advised that since there was surplusage of teachers in private colleges, generally, and as steps are being taken for deploying them to other private colleges, the request was being rejected. The teachers who stand affected thereby have approached this Court by way of these proceedings.2. Relying on a decision of this Court in O.P. No. 21268 of 2002, the petitioners submit that the objection as above is misconceived, if not illegal. On a perusal of the facts and the law that has to be applied, the contention appears to be sustainable, and the merits therefore could be examined.3. The first respondent in the Writ Petition is the State represented by the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »