Kerala Court February 2006 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.
Pious Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-21-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2387; 2006(2)KLT36
V.K. Bali, C.J.1. The appellant, petitioner in the original lis is undergoing sentence for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He has been on study leave for 6 years 10 months and 13 days. He availed of this leave during the period of imprisonment. In the Writ Petition filed by him he sought this period to be included in the sentence imposed upon him. If the period as referred to above, is taken as period of sentence undergone, it is further his case that he would be eligible for release. His plea for a direction to be issued to the respondents, i.e. The State of Kerala and Superintendent of Central Prison, Kannur to treat the period of study leave as period of sentence already undergone and direct the second respondent to consider his name for release on parole, however, failed before the learned Single Judge vide order dated 30.3.2005 recorded in W.P. (C) No. 11012 of 2004. It is against this order that the present Writ Appeal has been filed.2. The respondents in t...
Natarajan Vs. General Manager, Southern Railway
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-21-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ARBLR149(Kerala); 2006(2)KLT390
R. Basant, J. 1. Can the non production of the arbitration agreement or copy affect the prayer under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act Is Section 8(2) mandatory in the sense that even innocuous non compliance must entail rejection of the claim under Section 8 These are the questions that arise for consideration. 2. The petitioner is the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of money from the respondents - Southern Railway and its officials. The petitioner had entered into an agreement/ contract with the respondents defendants. In that agreement there is an incorporation by reference, of the General Conditions of Contract of the Indian Railways and Clause 64 of the said general conditions contains a stipulation for arbitration. On receipt of the summons in the suit, the respondents entered appearance and filed a written statement dated 09-02-98. In the written statement a plea regarding stipulation for arbitration was raised specifically. In the last para of the written state...
Mary Vs. Jose Mathew
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-21-2006
Reported in: III(2006)ACC727; 2006ACJ2693; [2006(110)FLR1111]; 2006(3)KLT168
K.K. Denesan, J.1. Appellants are the legal heirs/dependents of deceased Raphel who met with an accident on 29.8.1995 while employed as the driver of the 1st respondent and subsequently died on 30th September 1995. The 2nd respondent is the insurer. Appellants preferred a claim under Section 4 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (for short, the Act) before the Workmen's Compensation Court claiming compensation for the death of Sri Raphel alleging that the accident arose out of and in the course of employment under the 1st respondent.2. The Court of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation raised the following issues for consideration:1. Whether the deceased was a workman as defined in the Act?2. Whether the death resulted from the personal injury sustained to him in an accident arising out and during the course of his employment?3. Whether the applicants are entitled to the amount claimed?4. Which opposite party is liable for the compensation, if any?The issues were answered in favour...
Thayyil Enterprises Vs. Income Tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-21-2006
Reported in: (2006)206CTR(Ker)654; [2006]287ITR414(Ker); 2006(4)KarLJ40
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioner is challenging Ext P-5 order wherein the Commissioner of Income Tax has confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer under the Income Tax Act cancelling renewal of registration of the firm granted to the petitioner under Section 186 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment years 1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93. The petitioner is a partnership constituted for construction of a building which is let out on rent. The firm was granted registration under the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 1989-90 and the registration was allowed to continue for the subsequent three, assessments years 1990-91 to 1992-93. However, after granting renewal, the officer later noticed that there is no genuine firm in existence as the firm is not engaged in any business and therefore, he cancelled the renewal of registration granted for the three assessment years which is confirmed by the Commissioner in revision. It is this order which is under challenge in this O.P...
Jose Paul Vs. Joint Registrar
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-20-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)KLT976
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner is a member of the second respondent Co-operative Society. By separate judgment delivered today, I have disposed of WP(C). No. 7143/2005 filed in relation to a no-confidence motion against an elected member of the Society, who is also the honorary Secretary. This Writ Petition was filed during the pendency of the aforesaid Writ Petition.2. The petitioner herein seeks a direction to the first respondent, Joint Registrar, to convene an extra-ordinary meeting of the Society for considering a no-confidence motion by the petitioner against the committee of the Society. According to the petitioner, for different reasons, Ext.P2, a requisition in writing, was made by l/5th of the total number of the members and following the inaction on the said requisition, the petitioner approached the first respondent on 5-3-2005, making Ext.P4 request and no proceedings have been initiated by the first respondent to convene the meeting pursuant to Ext,P4. i...
Vishala Kochi Kudivella Samrakshana Samithi Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-20-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)KLT919
S. Siri Jagan, J.1. These Original Petitions are in the nature of public interest litigation ventilating the grievances of the people of West Kochi who have been clamouring for supply of potable drinking water to them, for the last more than three decades. They have approached this Court as a last resort, their lamentations before the powers that be having fallen on deaf ears.2. The pleadings in these Original Petitions give no room for any doubt that the grievances ventilated by the petitioners representing the people of West Kochi is a genuine and eminently deserving appropriate orders from this Court. Respondents do not dispute the necessity to provide drinking water to the people of West Kochi. These Original Petitions have been pending since April, 2000. Although the respondents have been submitting before this Court that steps are being taken to complete projects for the supply of water to people of West Kochi, nothing concrete in the form of actual supply of water has emerged so...
Jacob Vs. District Collector
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-20-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)BC369; 2006(2)KLT4
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioner is challenging revenue recovery proceedings for recovery of amount decreed by the civil court against the petitioner ill favour of the third respondent-Bank. It is conceded that the amount decreed is liability due to the Bank in the Credit Card account of the petitioner. The petitioner who was holding a Savings Bank Account did not provide sufficient funds in the account for the Bank to adjust the same against debit balance in the Credit Card Account. Accordingly Bank filed suit and obtained a decree against the petitioner for recovery of the outstanding amount with interest thereon. As on the date of initiation of revenue recovery proceedings the amount due from the petitioner to the Bank was Rs. 34,264/- with future interest.2. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that revenue recovery proceedings cannot be initiated for recovery of amount due under Credit Card account as the notification issued by the Government namely, SRO 797/1997 under ...
Mattachan Vs. Joint Registrar (General)
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-20-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)KLT45
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. This writ petition relates to Parur Taluk Merchants' Co-operative Society Ltd. No.E. 1060. An 11 member Committee came into office on 24-12-2001. Respondents 3 and 4 were elected as President and Vice President respectively and the petitioner and respondents 5 to 10 were the members of the Managing Committee. The said Managing Committee is stated to be the first elected committee after the registration of the Society.2. The Society, not being in a financial position to adopt the statutory staff pattern, provided for the appointment of an elected member to work as Secretary in an honorary capacity instead of paid Secretary under Rule 188 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules'). The petitioner, an elected member, was thus made the honorary Secretary.3. This Writ Petition is filed to quash Ext.P6 proceedings by which a meeting was convened to discuss a no-confidence motion against the petitioner the honora...
Khadeeja Vs. District Collector
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-20-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)KLT654
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The question that is posed for consideration in these cases is whether the amount of penalty could be recovered under Section 142 (1) (c) (i) of the Customs Act read with the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act against the personal properties left behind by the defaulters for an offence of smuggling which is against the national interest? 2. Petitioners in O.P. Nos. 21354 of 1999 and 28882 of 2002 are the son and daughter of one late Kallatra Abdul Khader Haji and the petitioner in O.P.No. 20917 of 1999 is the wife of one late M.B. Moosa. The reliefs sought for in all the Original Petitions are identical. Petitioners have sought for a declaration that they are not liable to pay the penalty due from their predecessors' interest and that the movable and immovable properties are not liable to be proceeded with for the recovery of the amounts due from late Abdul Khader Haji and Moosa respectively. 3. Customs Authorities had intercepted a fishing boat on 22.3.1974 from Neel...
Jacob Varghese Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-20-2006
Reported in: (2007)207CTR(Ker)481; [2006]287ITR442(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioner is challenging exhibit P7 whereunder the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax has rejected the petitioner's application for waiver of interest levied under Section 220(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for belated payment of income-tax for the assessment year 1985-86. Counsel contended that the petitioner's income was mainly from a partnership firm in the form of bar hotel.2. According to the petitioner, the firm's assessment was revised which led to revision of demand of tax in the petitioner's name which caused delay in payment of tax. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, instead of considering the matter by himself under Section 220(2A) of the Income-tax Act referred to the report of the Commissioner of Income-tax and dismissed the claim.3. Standing counsel for the Revenue, on the other hand, contended that the Commissioner has not sent any report but has forwarded the report from the Assessing Officer w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »