Kerala Court August 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.
thethavusamy Vs. Radhakrishnan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-18-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)KLT226
K.N. Basha, J.1. Criminal Appeal No. 769 of 1998 is filed by the complainants challenging the acquittal of the respondent accused for the alleged offence under Sections 448, 354, 379 read with 34 I.P.C.2. Criminal Appeal No. 235 of 2006 is filed by the accused challenging the conviction and sentence imposed for an offence under Section 323 of I.P.C. to pay a fine of Rs.200/-in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months.3. In view of the appeal against the acquittal filed by the complainants, the appeal preferred before the Sessions Court by the accused is transferred to this Court.4. The learned Counsel for the appellants as well as the learned Counsel for the respondents in both the matters submitted that this is a matter relating to a dispute regarding the purchase of a house on the basis of an agreement entered into between the accused and the complainants.5. It is seen from the records that the complaint was preferred bytwo persons namely Dr. J.A. Thethavusamy and Mrs. A...
Deputy Commissioner (Law), Commercial Taxes Vs. Malabar Cashewnuts and ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-18-2006
Reported in: (2007)10VST479(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The question raised in the tax revision case is whether the Tribunal is justified in confirming the order of the first appellate authority granting concessional rate of tax at four per cent on inter-State sale of goods not covered by original portion of C form but based on duplicate part of the C form produced by the party. Even though notice was served on the respondent, respondent failed to appear in court and therefore, we heard the Special Government Pleader for the revision petitioner and proceed to dispose of the case on merits.2. It is seen that the respandent-assessee failed to produce original of the C form and therefore, concessional rate of tax at four per cent was not allowed by the assessing officer on the inter-State sales turnover not covered by original C form. However in first appeal, the respondent-asses-see produced duplicate portion of the lost C form which was accepted by the appellate authority and granted concessional rate of tax. The...
Sugathan Vs. Shahul Hameed
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KarLJ54
S. Siri Jagan, J.1. When these Writ Appeals came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court, the Division Bench perceived a conflict between two earlier Division Bench decisions, one in W.A. No. 1563/2001 and connected cases and the other in W.A. No. 424/2000, on the same issue, which is under consideration in these Writ Appeals. The Division Bench therefore chose to refer the matter for decision by a Full Bench. It is under the above circumstances that these Writ Appeals have come up for hearing before us.2. The common issue involved in these cases is as to whether the Government Order, issued in G.O(Ms) No. 39/2001/TD dated 30-3-2001 ordering that, while applying the 1:1 ratio, now existing in the Kerala Excise and Subordinate Service Rules, for promotion to the category of Excise Preventive Officer from among Excise Guards possessing the minimum qualification of SSLC and those who do not possess SSLC qualification, a senior Excise Guard, who possesses the minimum education...
Jancy Chandy Vs. Jose Puthenkala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KLT116
Kurian Joseph, J.1. Politics without principle is one of the seven capital sins to be deprecated, according to the Father of our Nation, Mahatma Gandhi. Political defection is one of the grave vices in that group. In the statement of objects and reasons for the Fifty-second Amendment to the Constitution introducing Tenth Schedule in order to prevent frequent political defects, it is stated as follows:The evil of political defections has been a matter of national concern. If it is not combated, it is likely to undermine the very foundations of our democracy and the principles which sustain it.While upholding the constitutional validity of the Tenth Schedule, the Supreme Court in Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992) Supp. 2 SCC 651 observed as follows:A political party goes before the electorate with a particular programme and it sets up candidates at the election on the basis of such programme. A person who gets elected as a candidate set up by a political party is so elected on the basi...
Aniyan Thomas Chacko Vs. thevarvelil Bankers
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-16-2006
Reported in: [2007]135CompCas262(Ker); 2006CriLJ4356; 2006(4)KLT245
ORDERR. Basant, J.1. Can the cause of action under Section 142(b) of the N.I. Act be said to commence from the date on which a defective notice, against which specific objection is taken by the payee of the cheque, is received? Will the clock of limitation start ticking on the lapse of 15 days from the date of receipt of such notice? These are the crucial questions that arise for consideration in this revision petition directed against a concurrent verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence.2. To the skeletal fact first. The signature in the cheque is admitted. Handing over of the cheque is also admitted. Transactions between the parties is not disputed. The cheque is for an amount of Rs. 50,000/- It bears the date 10.6.2002. The cheque was admittedly dishonoured on the ground of insufficiency of funds. It was initially dishonoured in June, 2002. A notice of demand, Ext.D4, was issued on 29.6.2002. Ext.P8 reply was given to Ext.D4 notice. In Ext.P8 a contention was raised that no such ...
Kurian Lizy Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-16-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KLT264
V.K. Bali, C.J.1. Whether the right of the management of a religious minority educational institution to choose a qualified person as Headmaster of the School would come within the protective cover of Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India and if so, can it be regulated through a legislative act or an executive rule is the question that requires adjudication by a Full Bench on a reference made by a learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) No. 37646 of 2003 and a Division Bench in W.A. No. 12 of 2006, noting an apparent conflict between two Division Bench decisions of this Court in Varkey v. State of Kerala : 2005(2)KLT468 and Annie Francis v. D.E.O., Aluva : 2005(3)KLT238 . Whereas, a Division Bench in Varkey's case (supra) held that unbridled power cannot be given to every minority institution in the matter of selection of Headmaster overlooking the claims of the other eligible teachers, the other Division Bench in Annie Francis's case (supra) held that management of a minority educationa...
Deepika Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-14-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)KLT71
P.R. Raman, J.1. Petitioner is a High School Assistant who was selected for the B.Ed Degree Course. Her selection was in terms of Ext. P1, a proceeding issued by the Director of Public Instruction. As per Clause 7 of Ext. P1, the trainee will not be entitled for both subsistence allowance as well as leave salary for the period while undergoing the course. Petitioner opted for the leave salary instead of subsistence allowance. She applied for leave for completing the B.Ed course. By Ext. P2 order of the Deputy Secretary to Government, petitioner was granted Half Pay Leave for 115 days from 5.6.2003 to 27.9.2003 and Leave without allowances for 186 days from 20.9.2003 to 31.3.2004 for study purpose under Rule 91 Part I of the Kerala Service Rules. As per Rule 91 Parti K.S.R., officers with a continuous officiating or temporary service of two years or more, will be granted in addition to any leave which they are eligible for, leave under this rule for obtaining superior qualifications pro...
Govindji Padamshi Vs. Bhawanji Hansraj
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KarLJ1009
M. Ramachandran, J.1. The order passed in I.A. No. 976 of 2002 in O.S. No. 389 of 1995, by the Principal Sub Judge, Kochi dated 1.10.2002 evidenced by Ext.P12 is under challenge at the instance of the plaintiff. I may extract the order as herein below:The prayer is to dispense with the procedure laid down in the amended C.P.C. in the matter of chief examination of witnesses by filing proof affidavit. The witness who is also an advocate is present before Court and is ready to file proof affidavit on true facts if so asked by counsel for petitioner. But the counsel for the party at whose instance the witness is summoned apprehends that the witness will not swear the affidavit in such a way to favour the case of his party. Court's function is to get at the truth.To meet the ends of justice and keeping in view of the solemn duty of court to arrive at the truth, it is hereby ordered that as in the case of a witness who will not support the case of a party prior to C.P.C. amendment, the peti...
Suresh Babu Vs. Leela
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)KLT891
K.T. Sankaran, J.1. The question which arises for consideration in this Appeal is whether in a petition for dissolution of marriage filed by the wife under Section 13(1)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, a Hindu husband who embraced Islam by conversion could put forward a valid defence that the conversion to Islam was with the consent of the wife and thereby avert an order for dissolution of marriage.2. The respondent herein filed a Petition under Section 13(1)(ia), (ib) and (ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act praying for the dissolution of her marriage with the appellant. The marriage was solemnized on 1st November 1992. There are two children born in the wedlock. The respondent alleged that the respondent has meted out cruelty towards her and he deserted her. It is also alleged that the appellant herein embraced Islam and married one Fathima and they are living together. The appellant denied the allegation of cruelty and desertion. However, it is admitted by the appellant that he converted t...
Santhosh George Vs. Mathai
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-11-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)KLT584
K. Padmanabhan Nair, J.1. The first respondent in Election O.P. 12/2005 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Muvattupuzha, which is the designated court for conducting court for conducting trial of Election Petitions arising from the election to the local bodies, is the petitioner in this Writ Petition. The petitioner and the respondents were candidates for the election to Ward No. VI of Paingottur Grama Panchayat in Ernakulam District for which polling was held on 24.9.2005. The petitioner was declared elected. The petitioner secured 358 votes and the first respondent secured 327 votes. The second respondent got only five votes. 11 votes were declared invalid.2. The first respondent filed O.P. No. 12/2005 to declare the election of the petitioner void on the ground that the petitioner is an employee working in Model Engineering College, Thrikkakara, run by the Institute of Human Resources Development for Electronics ('IHRDE' for short) which is a corporation fully controlled by the Gover...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »