Kerala Court January 2005 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.
Sreenarayanan Elayath Vs. K.S.E.B.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-19-2005
Reported in: [2005(105)FLR311]; 2005(1)KLT644
Kurian Joseph, J. 1. The issue raised in all these Writ Petitions pertains to promotion to the post of Overseer (Electrical) in the Kerala State Electricity Board. The question to be decided is as to when there are more than one feeder category carrying different scales of pay, should there be preference to the category with higher scale of pay as against length of service, in the matter of promotion to a higher post. The documents are referred to as marked in O.P. No. 8816 of 2003. Under the 1978 long term settlement it was agreed to provide for a ratio for promotion to the post of Lineman. It will be profitable to extract the relevant clause in the settlement which is produced as Ext.R3(a).'5. In view of the loss of promotion opportunities arising from enhancement of work-norms, it is agreed subject to the concurrence of Public Service Commission that:(a) Lineman: All the vacancies of Lineman that will occurimmediately on the implementation of the revised work-norms will be filled up...
Jamal Vs. Nafeesu
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-19-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)KLT53
ORDERK.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Right to seek an order of eviction under Section 11(4)(i) would be available to a landlord from the date of commencement of Act 2 of 1965 or from the date when the Act has been made applicable to the area notified by the Government under Section 1(3) of the Act is the question that arises for consideration in this case.2. A Division Bench of this Court in Kumaran v. Jose, 2001 (2) KLT 464, took the view that a landlord would be entitled to an order of eviction under Section 11(4)(i) of the Act only if he establishes that there was an unauthorised subletting of the tenanted premises without his consent after the publication of the notification making the Act applicable to the said area in question. Division Bench placed reliance on the decisions of the Supreme Court in Gurcharan Singh v. V.K. Kaushal, (1980) 4 SCC 244 and Tirath Ram Gupta v. Gumbachan Singh, (1987) 1 SCC 712. A Division Bench consisting of K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. and Pius C. Kuriakose, J. do...
Mangalam Publications (India) (P) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Inco ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-19-2005
Reported in: (2005)194CTR(Ker)210
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Petitioner is challenging Ext. P10 order which is a detailed note issued by the AO justifying reopening of IT assessment completed for the year 1999-2000 under Section 147 of the IT Act. Even though the Supreme Court has in the decision reported in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO and Ors. (2003) 259 ITR 19 held that assessee is entitled to get reasons for reopening of assessment and this Court in the judgment in WP No. 26551 of 2004, dt. 10th Sept., 2004 further held that any contest on merits against the validity of reassessment should be made through an appeal against reassessment after completion of the assessment. Therefore, petitioner's objections to Ext. P10 and further objections if any will be considered in detail in reassessment proceedings and it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the grounds for reopening and the procedure followed in appeal against assessment and the appellate authority will be absolutely free to go into the validit...
Remya R. Chandran Vs. D.E.O.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)KLT702
K.M. Joseph, J.1. The petitioner's mother died in harness on 29.1.1989 while working as H.S.A. Petitioner says that she is a major. Her mother was survived by her husband and another daughter. The petitioner has passed Plus Two Examination. She contends that she is qualified to be appointed as Clerk/Peon/Attender or full time Menial in Aided Schools. According to her, on the basis of her being a dependent of her late mother, who died in harness on 29.1.1989, she submitted an application on 19.8.2002. Since the first respondent informed her that she has to send the application to the second respondent, application was submitted on 19.8.2002 before the second respondent, who is the Manager of the Aided School. By order dated 13.11.2002, her application for compassionate appointment was rejected. She preferred an appeal before the D.E.O., Mavelikkara. She contends that she had produced the prescribed proforma duly filled in and Income Certificate issued by the Village Officer. It was also...
Petronet Cck Ltd. Vs. Vijayan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)KLT773
ORDERS. Sankarasubban, J.1. In these Revision Petitions, the petitioner Petronet CCK Ltd. has challenged the order passed by the District Court Palakkad condoning the delay in filing the application for enhanced compensation under Section 10(2) of the Petroleum and Minerals, Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Act provides for the acquisition of right of use of the land for laying pipelines for transport of petroleum and minerals and for matters connected therewith. As per the provisions of the Act, the owners of the land are entitled to compensation for the damages caused to the land. This is to be determined by the competent authority under the Act.2. The owners of the land were not satisfied with the order passed by the competent authority. They have approached the District Court by challenging the order passed by the competent authority, Section 10(2) of the Act says thus:'If the amount of compensation determined b...
P.V.K. Menon Vs. Excelads (P) Ltd.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-18-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Ker166; 2005(1)KLT995
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. (Agreeing with A.K. Basheer, J.) 1. This matter has been placed before me in view of the difference of opinion expressed by two learned Judges of this Court in P.V.K.Menon v. Excelads (P) Ltd., 2004 (2) KLT 1130, on the question of court fee payable in the appeal preferred by the defendants as per Explanation 4 of Section 52 of the Court Fees Act.2. Learned Judge S.Sankarasubban took the view that additional defendants 3 to 9 need pay court fee for the reliefs they prayed for in the appeal though they had not raised any counter claim in the suit. Learned Judge A.K. Basheer on the other hand took the view that additional defendants 3 to 9 have to pay court fee on the subject matter of the suit, Rs. 75 lakhs, since they have not raised any counter claim in the suit on payment of court fee.3. O.S. No. 479 of 1999 was a suit filed by respondents 1 and 2 herein as against defendants 1 and 2 who are respondents 3 and 4 herein for specific performance of four agreements...
Babu Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)KLT975
M. Sasidharan Nambiar, J.1. Accused in C.C. No. 850/90 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kannur is the revision petitioner. He was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 500/- with a default sentence of two months for the offence under Section 324 of IPC and simple imprisonment for 15 days for the offence under Section 7(1)(d) of Protection of Civil Rights Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Petitioner challenged conviction and sentence before Sessions Court, Thalassery in Crl.A.No. 275/94. Learned Additional Sessions Judge after reappraising the evidence modified the conviction for the offence to one under Section 323 of IPC and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 500/-. Conviction arid sentence for the offence under Section 7(1)(d) of the Act was confirmed. It is being challenged in this revision. 2. Charge against petitioner was that on 7.3.1988 at about 7.30 a.m. while PW1 Narayanan a member of Pulaya community was taking tea ...
State of Kerala Vs. Yesodharan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)KLT408
K.K. Denesan, J.1. State is the appellant. Appeal arises from the judgment in L. A.R.48/95 decided by the Sub Court, Sulthan Bathery on 31.5.2000.2. An extent of 0.0970 hectares of land in survey No. 76/15 in Purakkadi Village belonging to the claimant was acquired for the Karapuzha Irrigation Project. Statutory notification was published on 10.1.1994. Land Acquisition Officer passed the award on 29.10.1994. The property was taken possession on 18.1.1994. Inclusive to all statutory benefits the respondent-claimant was given Rs. 82,895/- as compensation by the Land Acquisition Officer. Dissatisfied, respondent-claimant filed application for enhancement of the compensation.3. Value of the land for the purpose of compensation was fixed not on the basis of centage value but by capitalisation method. There were 104 yielding coffee plants and 69 pepper plants in the acquired property. According to the respondent average yield per plant ought to have been estimated as 3 kgs. as against 2 Kgs....
Sen Vs. Co-operative Medical College
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Ker245; 2005(2)ESC1362; 2005(1)KLT612
B. Subhashan Reddy, C.J. 1. This batch of cases relates to admissions into M.B.B.S. course for the academic year 2004-05 and involves interpretation of the proviso to Sub-section (4) of Section 3 of the Kerala Self-financing Professional Colleges (Prohibition of Capitation Fees and Procedure for Admission and Fixation of Fees) Act, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Writ Appeals are directed against the orders of the learned Single Judge dismissing their claims for admission into respondents-medical colleges which are self-financing colleges within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the Act. The Act came into force on 15.7.2004 on receipt of the assent of the Governor and then gazetted. The history leading to the enactment of the Act need not be gone into except in stating that the Act is purported to have been made pursuant to the observations of the Five Judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka (2003 (3) KLT (SC) (S...
Sandeep Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Ker148; 2005(1)KLT549
B. Subhashan Reddy, C.J.1. The Writ Appeals are directed against the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge by which the fees directed to be paid by the self-financing colleges at the rate fixed by Justice K.T.Thomas Committee was not stayed but was directed to be paid subject to the result of the Writ Petition. As the matter is concerning the educational institutions and at the request of the learned counsel, the Writ Petitions were drawn to be heard along with the Writ Appeals. We proceed to consider the merits of the case in the Writ Petitions by which Writ Appeals also get disposed of.2. Writ petitioners are the students of medicine having been admitted to the self- financing colleges for the academic year 2003-2004. They had, by now, completed their first year of study and entered second year.3. These Writ Petitions were filed aggrieved by the demand of the respondents/ private self-financing medical colleges to pay the amount of Rs. 1,13,000/- as fixed by Justice K.T.Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »