Kerala Court May 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.
Vasudevan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ3173; 2006(2)KLT1019
ORDERV.K. Bali, C.J.1. Petitioner - Vasudevan was tried for the offences under Sections 451 and 354 of Indian Penal Code. After the trial on the offences mentioned above, he was held guilty and convicted under Section 354 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months as also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,0007- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. He was also held guilty and convicted under Section 451 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months as also to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. There was a further direction to pay a compensation of Rs. 1000/- under Section 357(1)(b) Cr.P.C. out of the fine realised. Being aggrieved by the order dated 18th February, 1995 passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mavelikara, petitioner filed an appeal which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Mavelikara vide order dated 9th August, 1996. It is against these two ...
Vimala Ravindranath Vs. Secretary, R.T.A.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-2006
Reported in: I(2007)ACC121; AIR2006Ker299; 2006(2)KLT1030
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioners are two operators of stage carriages in Thrissur and Palakkad Districts. Ext. P3 letter is issued to them by the first respondent. Secretary, R.T.A., directing them to provide concesions to physically handicapped persons. That communication is issued on the basis of complaints made by certain physically handicapped persons alleging that the petitioners are not extending the benefit of concession to them. By Ext. P3, the petitioners were directed to comply with G.O. (P) No. 1/87/PW & T, also by stating that the concession is allowed at the rate of 70% of the prescribed fare for physically handicapped persons and it applies to minimum fare also. The decision contained in the said letter is under challenge.2. According to the petitioners, they were granted permits without imposing any condition as contemplated in Section 72 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Government have not framed any rule to provide for concessions to physically hand...
Merchants Association Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT306; (2006)IIILLJ365Ker
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Clause 29A introduced with effect from 18.11.2002 of the Kerala Headload Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Scheme') framed under the Kerala Headload Workers Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is questioned in this case as unconstitutional and ultra vires of the provisions of the Act. Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978 (Act No. 20 of 1980) is a unique legislation to regulate the employment of headload workers in the State and to make provision for their welfare, settlement of disputes in respect of their employment or non-employment and other connected matters. There is no such legislation in any other States in India. There were many disputes in the State of Kerala regarding engagement/employment of headload workers. Because of the powerful unions organised by the headload workers, the workers used to charge exorbitant rates for each headload they carry. There were inter-union rivalries also. Since headl...
Firos Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Ker279; 2006(3)KLT210; 2007(34)PTC98(Ker)
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Appellant/petitioner approached this Court for declaring that Section 70 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is unconstitutional and unenforceable and also for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P10 notification issued by the Government of Kerala under Sub-section (1) of Section 70 of the Act (Central Act No. 21 of 2000). According to the appellant, while disposing of the Writ Petition, the learned single Judge did not enter into any finding regarding the constitutional validity of Section 70 of the Act though it upheld ExtP10 notification issued by the State Government. The learned single Judge also directed to withdraw the suit for declaration of copyright and for injunction filed against the petitioner though the learned single Judge held that the suit is maintainable. The court also directed respondents 1 to 4 to withdraw the criminal complaint filed against the petitioner if the petitioner accepts the judgment ...
Cherukode Co-op. Rural Bank Ltd. Vs. Parur Service Co-op. Bank
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT38
J.B. Koshy, J.1. In these group of cases, the main question to be decided is whether Co-operative banks are liable to comply with the directions of the Reserve Bank of India issued from time to time. W.A.No. 707 of 2003 was filed by Wandoor Service Co-operative Bank Limited against the judgment of the learned single Judge in O.P.No. 26589 of 2002. The above O.P. was filed for a declaration that the registration of Wandoor Co-operative Rural Bank Ltd., fourth respondent in the O.P. in violation of the provisions of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (in short B. R. Act) and not to permit the fourth respondent to function as a Rural Bank. The learned single Judge found that the fourth respondent was not a primary agricultural credit co-operative society as defined under Section 2(c) of the Co-operative Societies Act as the bye-laws would show that it was for providing credit facilities for industry, education, trade and employment and the above Rural Cooperative Bank is, in fact, an Urban ...
Sankara Narayanan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT429
V.K. Bali, C.J.1. A school going aged 13 years, daughter of Poovanchery Thekkeveettil Sankara Narayanan alias Kutty (A1) was raped and murdered by Ahmmed Koya. After this heinous crime when the deceased somehow obtained bail, A1 in conspiracy with Thazhethethil Animon alias Mohan and Mancheriyil Sankaranarayanan, A2 and A3 respectively, is said to have committed his murder. The prosecution in the trial held against the appellants named above was able to secure conviction of A1 on the basis of circumstantial evidence consisting of strong motive that actuated him to commit the crime as also recovery of the crime gun. He was thus held guilty for offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-. He was also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for three months under Section 201 IPC. He was further sentenced to undergo imprison...
General Secretary, S.B.T. Staff Union Vs. Managing Director, S.B.T.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT614; (2007)ILLJ149Ker
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Petitioner, a trade union, is challenging Ext.P4 award of the Labour Court, Kozhikode, upholding the selection of second respondent as Head Security Guard of the security staff at the Civil Station Branch of State Bank of Travancore, Kannur in preference to another security guard in the same unit by name Mr. M.C. Chandran Nambiar, who is senior in service to the second respondent by three years. The Civil Station Branch of the SBT, Kannur, which did not have regular security unit constituted a security unit vide Ext.PI proceedings dated 1.9.1993. Four security guards from various branches of SBT were transferred and posted at the Civil Station Branch at Kannur, vide Ext.Pl common order of transfer constituting security unit of the Bank at the Branch there. From among four persons appointed as security guards at Civil Station Kannur, the person shown first in Ext.Pl, namely M.C. Chandran Nambiar, was admittedly senior to the second respondent (Sl.No. 7 in Ex...
Premanand Vs. Mohan Koikal Overruled
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT103; 2008(1)SLJ198(Kerala)
V.K. Bali, C.J.1. Rule 27(c) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958, hereinafter referred to as 'KS & SSR', dealing with seniority reads as follows:(c) Notwithstanding anything contained in Clauses (a) and (b) above, the seniority of a person appointed to a class, category or grade in a service on the advice of 'the Commission shall, unless he has been reduced to a lower rank as punishment, be determined by the date of first effective advice made for his appointment to such class, category or grade and when two or more persons are included in the same list of candidates advised, their relative seniority shall be fixed according to the order in which their names are arranged in the advice list.2. The appellants, who were respondents in the original lis, would endeavour to give literal meaning to the statute and in as much as the date of first effective advice in the matter of their appointment was prior in point of time from the petitioners in the original lis, now arr...
Poovancherry thekkeveettil Sankara Narayanan and ors. Vs. State of Ker ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ3215
V.K. Bali, C.J.1. A school going girl aged 13 years, daughter of Poovanchery Thekkeveettil Sankara Narayanan alias Kutty (A1) was raped and murdered by Ahmmed Koya. After this heinous crime when the deceased somehow obtained bail, A1 in conspiracy with Thazhethethil Animon alias Ani Mohan and Mancheriyil Sankararmrayana, A1 and A3 respectively, is said to have committed his murder. The prosecution in the trial held against the appellants named above was able to secure conviction of A1 on the basis of circumstantial evidence consisting of strong motive that actuated him to commit the crimes as also recovery of the crime gun. He was thus held guilty for offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, He was also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs, 500/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for three months under Section 201, IPC. He was further sentenced to underg...
K. Pushparaj, Headmaster, Bavode East U.P. School Vs. K. Manoharan, As ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-24-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)SLJ185(Kerala)
S. Siri Jagan, J.1. This writ appeal comes up for hearing before this Full Bench since a Division Bench was of the opinion that the Full Bench decision of this Court in Sasidharan Nair v. State of Kerala 2003 Lab IC 2411, which overruled the Division Bench decision in Manager, AUP School. State of Kerala 1988 (1) KLT 402, requires reconsideration at the hands of a larger Bench.2. The bone of contention in this case, between the appellant and the 1st respondent, is the post of Headmaster of an aided U.P. School on promotion under Rule 45 of Chapter XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules (KER). The 1st respondent is a matriculate with I.T.C. and the senior most teacher of the school. After having entered service as an Assistant Teacher in another aided L.P. School on 2.6.1975, he joined the present school on 10.8.1977 after obtaining transfer in terms of Rule 11, Chapter XTV-A of the KER, as the junior-most teacher of the present school on 10.8.1977. The appellant commenced service in the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »