Kerala Court June 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.
Sailesh Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-23-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)KLT611
K.K. Denesan, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.2. Petitioner who was working as Upper Division Clerk in the Kerala Police Department happened to be convicted for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in C.C. 165/2001 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Kottay am. The Court which found him guilty imposed appropriate sentence also. Immediately on getting a copy of the judgment from the trial Court the third respondent passed Ext.P1 order dated 7.7.2003 removing the petitioner from service in the terms of Rule 18 of Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1960 on the ground that the removal from service is on account of the conduct of the petitioner which led to conviction by a criminal Court. Petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No. 557/2003 before the Court of Sessions, Kottayam. But the Court of Sessions confirmed the conviction, though modified the sentence into ...
K. Radhakrishnan and anr. Vs. Revenue Recovery Officer, Drt and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-23-2004
Reported in: IV(2006)BC130; [2006]129CompCas585(Ker)
P.R. Raman, J.1. The petitioners seek for issuance of a writ of mandamus to quash exhibit P3 in so far as it proceeds against the property covered by exhibit P2.2. By exhibit P3 the property in question has been notified for sale by the Recovery Officer under the provisions of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), based on the recovery certificate issued by the Debts Recovery Tribunal.3. According to the petitioners, the property against which proceedings are now initiated, belongs to him as per the judgment in O.S. No. 1511 of 1993 between the petitioners and others as plaintiffs and the Syndicate Bank and others as defendants.4. As per Section 29 of the Act, the provisions contained in the Second and Third Schedules to the Income-tax Act, 1961, as in force from time to time shall, as far as possible, apply with necessary modifications as if the said provisions and rules referred to the amount of debts due under...
N.C.K. Tourist Home (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Kozhikode Nagara Sabha
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-22-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)KLT839
ORDERR. Bhaskaran, J. 1. This revision is filed against the order passed by the District Court in appeal filed under Rule 24 of Taxation Rules in Schedule II of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1961. The petitioner is N.C.K. Tourist Home (Pvt) Ltd., which owns a lodging cum shopping complex near Mavoor Road in Kozhikode. The short point for consideration in the revision is whether the respondent-Corporation of Calicut is entitled to revise the property tax before the expiry of the five years after the general revision in 1994. It is the case of the petitioner that once the general revision is made the Corporation has to wait for five years to make any increase in the property tax and any change enhancing the tax within such period will be without jurisdiction, illegal and unenforceable. The District Court has stated that there is no challenge regarding the validity of the notice issued by the Secretary or about the power of the Secretary to issue such a notice under the provisions of th...
Aomanathan Vs. Deputy Director, Dairy Development Society
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-22-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)KLT887
M. Ramachandran, J.1. Ext.P5 proceedings drawn up by the third respondent-Returning Officer, who had been authorised to conduct an election to the Perumbalam Milk Producers Cooperative Society, Alappuzha, (4th respondent) (herein after referred to as the Society) is under challenge by the Chairman of the Administrative Committee, who is presently in office. The Society came into existence in 1995, but the Committee constituted could not carry out any functioning and the Department was constrained to appoint aft Administrator in the same year, under Section 33 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The term of the Administrator was not extended thereafter and practically the activities of the Society became defunct. After about eight years, there were proposals for resurrecting the Society. By Ext.P1 proceedings, the Department had appointed an Administrative Committee for reviving the institution. The order required them to re-Start the functioning of the institution and also for ta...
Mohanan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-22-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)KLT873
M. Ramachandran, J.1. The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General), Wayanad, by Ext.P1 dated 30.12.2003, had directed the President and members of the Director Board of the Wayanad Primary Agricultural and Rural Development Bank to show cause as to why action under Section 32(1) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act were not to be taken against them. A notice of hearing had also been offered. The complaint is that in spite of satisfactory explanation being given, by Ext. P2 dated 27.1.2004, the committee had been superseded by Ext. P3 order passed on 12.2.2004 and because of external interference. This has been subjected to challenge in these proceedings.2. The petitioner, who is the President of the superseded Director Board, submits that the steps taken ware vitiated by mala fides, without authority of law and especially were not maintainable or sustainable. The alternate remedy of appeal to the Government was not expeditious, especially taking notice of the circumstanc...
Achamma Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-22-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)KLT81
G. Sasidharan, J. 1. Petitioners are persons against whom prosecution was initiated alleging that the word 'non-fruit' on the label of sample of the food product taken from them is misleading and hence the samples were misbranded as per Section 2(ix)(g) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. Cases were taken on the basis of the complaints filed by the Food Inspector on the basis of report of the public analyst. Report of the public analyst is that the word 'non-fruit' on the label of the sample is misleading and hence the sample is misbranded as per Section 2(ix)(g) of the Act.2. Petitions are filed mainly for quashing the proceedings in the case against the petitioners. There is also prayer that Item A.20.01 of Appendix-B of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules insofar as it directs that the label has to mention the word 'synthetic' is ultra vires Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Declaration sought by some of the petitioners is that marketing of vinegar produc...
Malabar Oxygen Co. Vs. Additional Sales Tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-22-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)KLT987; (2008)11VST643(Ker)
N.K. Sodhi, C.J.1. What is the scope of the words 'taking effective steps' for the purpose of claiming sales tax exemption in terms of Government Notification S.R.O. No. 1092 of 1999 as amended by Notification S.R.O. No. 295 of 2000 is the short question which arises for consideration in this Writ Appeal directed against the judgment dated June 1st, 2004 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing W.P.(C) No. 1512 of 2004 filed by the appellant.2. The appellant is a small-scale industrial unit engaged in the manufacture of industrial and medical oxygen. The unit is situate at Chelari, Thenhipalam, District Malappuram. It is registered as a dealer under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act'). It applied for sales tax exemption to the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Malappuram. The application was rejected on the ground that the unit had not taken effective steps to start the industry before 1st January, 2000. Feeling aggrieved by this order, the appe...
Muneerul Islam Sangham Vs. Kunhammu
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-18-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Ker311; 2004(2)KLT906
ORDERK.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The question that has come up for consideration in this case is whether lack of registration of defendant Society with the Wakf Board could be set up as a bar in a suit filed for enforcement of right against the wakf?2. Plaintiffs instituted the suit for permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant Society. Defendant Society raised a preliminary objection that the suit is not maintainable since the plaintiffs failed to produce certificate of registration of the defendant Society with the Wakf Board. The Court below raised the following issue:Whether the Wakf Board registration of the defendant wakf is necessary for the plaintiffs to file and maintain the suit filed against the defendant wakf and its muthawalli?The Court below dismissed the preliminary objection and held that the suit is maintainable and the lack of registration cannot be set up herein as a defence against the plaintiffs. Section 87 of the Wakf Act stipulates that no suit, appeal ...
Mercy Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-18-2004
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR953]; 2004(2)KLT848
Kurian Joseph, J.1. Part-time employees are expected to render part-time service in Government offices. But many of them have been on the corridors of this Court as full time litigants for quite sometime. Despite several rounds of litigation they are denied at least part-time peace in service.2. Equal pay for equal work is one of the social and economic goals enshrined in the Constitution of India. Article 39 mandates that the State should avoid discrimination amongst the people doing similar work in matters relating to pay. It is a constitutional obligation of the State. As the Supreme Court observed, the constitutional philosophy must be allowed to become a part of every man in this country; then only would the Constitution reach everyone and he or she would be nearer the goals set by it, (Dharwad P.W.D. Employees Association v. State of Karnataka, (1990) 2 SCC 396). In the celebrated decision of the Supreme Court in Daily Rated Casual Labour v. Union of India, (1988) 1 SCC 122, the ...
Sudhakaran Vs. Public Service Commission
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jun-18-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)KLT958
Kurian Joseph, J.1. The Writ Petitioners are aggrieved since they are not appointed despite advice by the Public Service Commission. The Public Service Commission issued notification dated 16.12.1997 for preparing a ranked list for appointment to the post of Coach Builders in KSRTC. The notified vacancies were 192. Pursuant to the notification, the Commission prepared a ranked list on 27.12.2002. However before the publication of the ranked list the Corporation addressed Annexure-A letter dated 1.2.2002 requesting the Corporation as follows:-'In this context it may please be noted that the vacancy position was reported to the Commission based on the actual vacancies existed as on 31.12.97 and the vacancies likely to arise due to retirement in 1998, 1999, 2000 & 2001. KSRTC had received the Advice list of Drivers from the Commission and the selected candidates were already appointed in the existing vacancies. KSRTC has recently taken steps to streamline operation of services and a good ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »