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.
Khadi Grama Vyavasaya Association (State Committee) Vs. State of Keral ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-17-2006
Reported in: [2006]145STC601(Ker)
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Subject-matter of these writ appeals and writ petition is the validity and scope of Notification S.R.O. No. 291 of 2000 and S.R.O. No. 292 of 2000 granting or restricting exemptions and concessions from payment of sales tax to khadi and village industries (KV industries). Arguments were based on the doctrine of promissory estoppel and hostile discrimination.2. The Khadi and Village Industries Commission Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was enacted by the Indian Parliament for establishment of a commission for the development of KV industries and for matters connected therewith. 'Khadi' is defined under Section 2(d) as follows:(d) 'Khadi' means any cloth woven on handlooms in India from cotton, silk or woollen yarn handspun in India or from a mixture of any two or all of such yarns ;'Village industry' is defined under Section 2(h) of the above Act as follows:(h) Village industry means,--(i) any industry located in a rural area which produces any goods or...
K. Varghese Vs. Bhanuvikraman Unnithan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-17-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Ker192
ORDERK.T. Sankaran, J.1. The decree holder is the revision petitioner. He challenges the order passed by the executing Court dated 16-8-1994, by which the executing Court directed the decree holder to proceed against the Vimuktha Bhada Motor Service Society No. 4106, and not against its erstwhile Managing Director, namely, Bhanuvikraman Unnithan.2. The Vimuktha Bhada Motor Service Society No. 4106 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society') is a society registered under the Travancorc-Cochin Library, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955 (Act XII of 1955). The suit was filed by the revision petitioner against the Society for realisation of money. Pending the suit, a bus bearing Registration No. KLB 4125, belonging to the Society, was attached before judgment on 22-9-1990. Later, the suit was compromised between the parties and a compromise petition dated 1-10-1990, was filed. On the same date on which the compromise was signed by the parties, namely on 1-10-1990, a ...
Arumughan Vs. Kumaran Ezhuthassan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-16-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)KLT64
K.T. Sankaran, J.1. The appellant filed O.S.No. 186 of 1982 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Alathur against the respondent for declaration of title and injunction. The plaintiff claimed to be an assignee of the cultivating tenant. The claim of tenancy was disputed by the defendant and therefore the matter was referred to the Land Tribunal Sub-section 125(3) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. The Land Tribunal by order dated 08.10.1987 found against the claim of tenancy made by the plaintiff. Accepting that finding, the trial court dismissed the suit by the judgment and decree dated 20.12.1988.2. Challenging the judgment and decree of the trial court, the plaintiff filed A.S.No. 18 of 1989 on the file of the District Court, Palakkad. The appeal was filed on 6.2.1989. Along with the appeal an application -I.A. 117 of 1989 was filed for numbering the appeal, accepting the certified copy of the judgment of the trial court. In the affidavit accompanying that application, the plaintiff stat...
Maratt Rubber Ltd. Vs. Land Tribunal
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-16-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)KLT644
K.T. Sankaran, J.1. As per the proceedings of the Taluk Land Board, Ernad in CR 1/75/C7 dated 31.1.1983, the Taluk Land Board found that the petitioner Company was in possession of excess land and it was directed to surrender the excess land. The excess land includes an extent of 273.17 acres in RS.87/2 of Pallikkara Desom of Thikkodi Village and an extent of 15 acres and 25 1/2 cents in RS.42/2 of Thurayur Village. These lands were taken possession of.2. As per Section 90 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, after the determination of the extent and particulars of land to be surrendered, the Taluk Land Board shall forward the necessary documents to the Land Tribunal and direct the Land Tribunal to prepare and submit to the Taluk Land Board a compensation roll showing the details mentioned in Clause (a) to (e) of Sub-section (1) of Section 90. The Taluk Land Board directed the Land Tribunal to prepare a compensation roll. The Land Tribunal issued notice to the petitioner. Petitioner appeare...
Sunil Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-16-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)KLT851
M. Ramachandran, J.1. A batch of writ appeals along with a few Original Petitions/Writ Petitions had come up for hearing together. Original Petitions had been posted along with the writ appeals taking notice of the circumstance that identical issues have been agitated. The writ petitions had been filed challenging the constitutionality of SRO Nos. 326/96 and 225/98, whereby amendments were brought to Rule 2 of the Foreign Liquor Rules.2. The learned Judge had granted substantial reliefs to the petitioners recognising the merit of the contentions raised, but however taking notice of the circumstance that the petitioners had challenged a Rule after it had been deleted from the statute book and the delay had not been appropriately explained, he had refused to entertain arguments about the sustainability of the consequential proceedings. The follow up proceedings of prosecution initiated in enforcement of the Rule thus were to continue. The petitioners have filed the appeals, aggrieved tha...
Valsala Bai Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-15-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)KLT1
K.K. Denesan, J.1. Petitioner was the Principal of a Higher Secondary School before she retired from service on 31.5.2005. Ext. P1 charge memo was served on her by the fourth respondent Deputy Director of Education, Pathanamthitta. This was followed by Ext.P2 order dated 27.5.2005 passed by the second respondent placing the petitioner under suspension. Petitioner retired from service on 31.5.2005 while under suspension.2. Ext.P2 order of suspension was challenged by the petitioner before this Court and as per Ext.P3 judgment dated 1.6.2005 this Court directed the Government to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner against Ext.P2. Ext.P4 is the order passed by the Government disposing of the appeal as per G.O dated 12.7.2005. According to the Government the appeal was liable to be rejected. However it is to be noted that there is no reference to the main contention taken by the petitioner that neither the fourth respondent nor the second respondent has jurisdiction to proceed agai...
Sasibhooshan Vs. Kerala Lok Ayukta
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-15-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)KLT17
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Petitioner was the Director of Kerala State Literacy Mission Authority. Ext.Pl complaint dated 20-6-2000 was filed by the 2nd respondent against the Chief Secretary, petitioner and Vice Chairman of the Kerala State Literacy Authority before the Lok Ayukta for the alleged irregularity committed by the petitioner and others starting from the meeting of the authorities from 4-10-1997 onwards. This was objected to by the petitioner contending that the complaint is not maintainable as the State Literacy Mission Authority will not come within the purview of Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, 1991 (in short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') . The Kerala State Literacy Mission Authority is a Society registered under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Act 1955 (in short T.C. Societies Act). Originally it was registered as Kerala Saksharatha Samithi. It was re-named Kerala State Literacy Mission Authority. The above Society was functioning with the grant...
Kunhipappada Beefathummabi Vs. Kunhipappada Kunhikoya
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-15-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Ker345; 2006(2)KLT560
K.M. Joseph, J.1. The parties to this Appeal, hail from the Kalpeni Island, which is a part of Lakshadweep, a group of Islands, which is a Union Territory since 1956. The question that has been referred to the Full Bench is whether, so far as the Velliyazhcha or Tarawad properties are concerned, a division should be per stripes or per capita.2. Before we deal with the question of law, which has been referred to us, it is necessary to state the facts leading upto the Appeal. The first respondent laid a Suit for partition. There are 13 defendants. Plaint B schedule property is the Tarawad property of the parties. The plaintiff claimed that it is liable to be divided into three shares and each thavazhy is entitled to one share each. C Schedule property belongs to the plaintiff and the first defendant, and the 13th defendant has no share in the C schedule property. The genealogical table of the parties projected in the Plaint is as follows:--------------------------------------------------...
A.C. Pavithran and Etc. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-15-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2702
V. Ramkumar, J.1. Accused Nos. 1 to 6 and 8 in S. C. No. 435/2000 on the file of the Addl. Sessions Court, Thalassery for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148 and 302 read with Section 149, IPC challenge the conviction entered and the sentence passed against them by that Court for the aforementioned offences.2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows:On 1-11-1998 at about 9.30 a.m. the 8 accused persons owing allegiance to the B.J.P. out of their political enmity towards the persons belonging to the C.P.I. (M) and in furtherance of their common object of causing the death of Pavithran a C.P.I. (M) activist, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly infront of the veranda of shop No. 37 of Thrippangttur Panchayath at, Poyiloor and armed with the deadly weap-ons like chopper, sword-stick, hatchet etc. and committed rioting. They attacked Pavithran who was sitting in front of the aforesaid shop by inflicting a stab injury on his right leg with a hatchet. Whe...
Krishnakumar Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-13-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)KLT75
K.K. Denesan, J. 1. Petitioners were appointed as Medical Officers (Specialist) in the Kerala Health Subordinate Service (Indian Systems of Medicine). Their appointment to the above post was from the open market. In the year 1991 they were promoted to the post of Senior Medical Officer (Specialist) which is category No. vii in the Kerala Health Service (Indian Systems of Medicine), hereinafter referred to as the 'Special Rules'.2. Rule 3 of the aforesaid Special Rules lays down the method of appointment. Category No. v Chief Medical Officer (Ayurveda) has to be filled up by transfer appointment of those belonging to category vi or Category No. vii. Rule 3(b) of the Special Rules reads as follows:Whenever there are more than one feeder category with different scales of pay, persons in the lower categories shall be considered for promotion/transfer only in the absence of suitable candidates in the higher categories. Along with the above provision in the special rules, it will be useful t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »