Kerala Court August 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.
Asokan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-03-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3848; 2005(3)KLT770
ORDERV. Ramkumar, J.1. The interesting question which comes up for consideration before us upon a reference by a Division Bench is the following:--'Whether the statement of an approver examined before the appropriate Magistrate under Clause (a) of Sub-section (4) of Section 306 Cr.P.C., is relevant and admissible under Section 33 of the Evidence Act during the subsequent trial in which he is not available for examination by reason of his death in the meanwhile?'The referring Bench was of the opinion that in the light of divergent views expressed by two Division Benches of this Court in Kurian v. State, 1989 (1) KLT SN 37 Case No. 60 and State of Kerala v. Monu Surendran, 1990 (1) KLT 53, regarding the right to cross-examine an approver, an authoritative pronouncement must come from a larger Bench.2. The appellants in this batch of appeals were the accused in the same or different cases popularly known as 'the mark list cases' tried by the Special Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram upon...
Sanjeev Vs. Karanakodam Sri Venkitachalapathy Devaswom
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-03-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Ker302; 2005(3)KLT874
R. Bhaskaran, J.1. This appeal is filed by the plaintiffs in O.S.No. 34 of 2002 on the file of the VIth Additional District Court, Ernakulam, dismissing an application seeking sanction to institute a suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Earlier, by order dated 10.12.2002, the District Court had allowed the application. Defendants filed C.R.P.No. 694 of 2003 before this Court. By order dated 15.3.2004, a learned single Judge of this Court allowed the revision and remanded the case to the Trial Court. The Trial Court while allowing the application under Section 92 stated that the petitioners are devotees and worshippers of the 1st defendant temple and the relief sought for is for settling a scheme for the administration of the temple. The learned Judge found that mere interest in the temple or the fact that the plaintiff is a devotee of the temple by itself is not sufficient to enable a person to file an application under Section 92. Only if two or more persons having an...
Roy M. Mathew Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-02-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)KLT802
Kurian Joseph, J. 1. Once an assessment under the Kerala Building Tax Act is subjected to appeal or revision and consequential assessment made, can the revised assessment be rectified in respect of an error committed by the appellate or revisional authority2. Exts.P6 and P9 proceedings and order respectively are under challenge. As per Ext.P9 the revision filed by the petitioner was returned on the ground that 50% of the tax demanded had not been paid. In the nature of the view I propose to take it is unnecessary to consider that issue. Ext.P6 is an order passed under Section 15(1) of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975. To the extent relevant Section 15(1) reads as follows:-'15. Rectification of mistake:--(1) The appellate authority or the revisional authority may, at any time within three years from the date of an order passed by it on appeal or revision, as the case may be, and the assessing authority may, at any time within three years from the date of any assessment or order passed ...
Prima Industries Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-02-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)KLT253; (2008)11VST806(Ker)
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioner is a private limited company engaged in the manufacture and sale of De-oiled cake, solvent extracted and refined oil. Company is a dealer on the roles of Additional Salestax Officer, II Circle, Palakkad.2. Government of Kerala had issued SRO 1729/03 in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 10 of the Kerala General Salestax Act, 1963 granting exemption to industrial units under medium and large scale industries and also small scale industrial units for a period of seven years from the date of commencement of commercialproduction in respect of tax payable under the Kerala General Salestax Act on the turnover of sale of goods manufactured and sold within the State. The company had started commercial production on 31-12-1996. Petitioner industry was also entitled to get the benefit of the said Government Order. On their application the Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation had issued eligibility certificate for sales tax exemption equal t...
HussaIn Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-02-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3916
Ram Kumar, J.1. In this appeal preferred from the Central Prison, Viyyur, the appellant (Hassan alias Hussain) who was the accused in Sessions Case No. 460/2001 on the file of the Addl. Sessions Court (Ad hoc), East Track Court No. 1, Manjeri, challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him under Section 302, I.P.C.THE PROSECUTION CASE 2. The Case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows :--On 8-2-2000 at or about 10.15 a.m. on the southern road margin of Mangalam Alungal Road in front of the vegetable shop of Muhamrnedkutty alias Kunhumon (PW-3) in Mangalam amsom and desom, on account of his previous enmity towards Kizhakepediyekal Muhammedali for not letting out the shop room in his possession, the accused knowingly and intentionally caused the death of the said Muhammedali by stabbing him on the back and front of his chest with a knife. The accused has thereby committed an offence of murder punishable under Section 302, I.P.C.3. PW-2 (Rashid, who is the ...
Francis Vs. Davis
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)KLT815
ORDERK.T. Sankaran, J.1. These Rent Control Revisions, namely, R.C.R. Nos. 465 of 2004 and 466 of 2004, are filed by the tenant in R.C.P. No. 40 of 2000 and R.C.P. No. 41 of 2000 respectively, on the file of the Rent Control Court, Irinjalakuda. The Rent Control Petitions were filed by the respondent landlord under Sections 11(2)(b) and 11(4)(ii) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Rent Control Court allowed the petitions under Section 11(4)(ii). The ground for eviction under Section 11(2)(b) was found against the landlord. The tenants filed R.C.A. Nos. 11 of 2002 and 12 of 2002, on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Thrissur challenging the orders of the Rent Control Court. The appeals were dismissed. The Rent Control Revisions are filed challenging the common judgment of the Appellate Authority.2. The case of the landlord is that the shop rooms in question were leased out to the tenants on monthly rent. There a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›