Kerala Court July 2007 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.
Dasan @ Devadasan Vs. Dharmajan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ184
ORDERPius C. Kuriakose, J.1. In this Civil Revision the judgment debtor impugns orders passed by the Execution Court in E.P. No. 180 of 2002 filed for the execution of a money decree directing the judgment debtor's arrest and detention on the basis of a finding that the judgment debtor in spite of means has willfully neglected to pay off the decree debt.2. The ground which is prominently raised in the memorandum is that E.P. No. 180/2002 was barred by principles of res judicata as envisaged by Explanation VII to Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Sri. K.G. Balasubramanian, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed before me a copy of the order dated 31-3-2000 passed by the court below in a previous Execution Petition filed by the respondent. That order is issued on the basis of a finding that the petitioner did not have the means to pay off the decree debt and also that the petitioner's health condition at that time will not permit him to undergo imprisonment. The learn...
A.i. Thomas Vs. Registrar of Co-op. Societies
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-17-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ104
K.M. Joseph, J.1. Petitioner challenges Ext. P3. He seeks a direction to the respondent to consider and dispose of Ext. P4 and declare that he is legally entitled to continue as the Chairman of Thrissur Circle Co-operative Union for the entire term he has been elected.2. The facts are not in dispute. Petitioner was elected as the member of the managing committee of the Thrissur Service Co-op. Bank on 14-03-2004. On 16-01-2006 an administrative committee has taken charge apparently acting under Section 33 of the Cooperative Societies Act. Prior to that, on 26-06-2004 petitioner was elected as the member of the Thrissur Circle Co-operative Union. On 15-06-2005 petitioner came to be appointed as the Chairman of the Thrissur Circle Co-operative Union. Ext. P3 is challenged by the petitioner. Ext. P3 is issued on behalf of the Registrar on 12-06-2007, wherein it is stated that in terms of Rule 143(2) petitioner has ceased to be the member on 16-01-2006 as the administrative committee has ta...
Anitha Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-17-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ279
A.K. Basheer, J.1. Petitioner was included in the ranked list published by the Kerala Public Service Commission for appointment to the post of High School Assistant (Sanskrit) in the Department of Education. She was placed at serial No. 9 in the list. At that time, petitioner was working as Part Time Junior Teacher (Sanskrit) in a Government Upper Primary School in Thiruvananthapuram District.2. Understandably when the Commission issued Exhibit P2 advice memo, petitioner gleefully accepted it. Of course, before issuance of Exhibit P2, the Commission had asked her willingness as to whether she was prepared to Work in a High School managed by a Grama Panchayat. According to the petitioner, she was left with no other choice, but to accept it, since she had been waiting in the queue for the order for the last more than three years.3. It is the admitted position that the petitioner had jointed service as High School Assistant in the High School run by a the Alagappa Nagar Grama Panchayat on...
Mohammed Zahir Vs. Additional Commissioner of Customs
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-13-2007
Reported in: 2009[13]STR322
S. Siri Jagan, J.1. The petitioner is a lawyer, who has been summoned under Section 108 of the Customs Act. Tine petitioner submits that as the lawyer appearing for some delinquents in proceedings under Section 124 of the Customs Act before the 2nd respondent, he filed an argument note in that proceedings. Apparently, based on the said argument note a show cause notice has been issued to the 3rd respondent in which proceedings have been initiated. The 3rd respondent wanted to cross examine the petitioner on the argument note. The application filed by the 3rd respondent before the adjudicating Authority seeking the same was rejected. The 3rd respondent filed an appeal and the Appellate Authority allowed the same by Ext. P-2. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs.(i) To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction quashing the findings arrived at by the 2nd respondent in Ext. P2 order dat...
Sivanandan C. Vs. Registrar of Births and Deaths
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-12-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Ker266; 2007(3)KLJ108
ORDERThottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner is the father of the pupil, in relation to whom, the Education Department has issued Ext. P1 certificate, which shows the name and date of birth of that pupil. According to the petitioner, Ext. P2 is a copy of the passport issued to his son. Ext. R1(a) shows that the birth of one 'Samal' on 17-8-1983 is registered on 26-8-1983 and on that day itself, a certificate of such registration of birth is issued. The controversy is as to whether the petitioner's son is 'Samal' in Ext. R. 1(a) and still further, as to whether, if that be so, could the date of birth as disclosed in Ext. R 1(a), be corrected. The plea of the petitioner is that he was employed elsewhere in the service of the Indian Army at the time of the birth of his son and his semi-literate brother had furnished details, which would have resulted in any registration, if at all there is one.2. Going by the counter-affidavit of the Municipal authorities, the petitioner had appl...
Asianet Satellite Communications (P) Ltd. Vs. Additional Sales Tax Off ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-12-2007
Reported in: (2007)10VST622(Ker)
H.L. Dattu, C.J.1. The orders of penalty passed for the assessment years 1993-94 to 1996-97 under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 by the assessing authority against the petitioner were the subject-matter of the writ petition. The learned single Judge has rejected the writ petition. Questioning the correctness or otherwise of the said order is the subject-matter of this writ appeal.2. The assessee is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (for short, 'the KGST Act') and also the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act'). The activity of the assessee is the distribution of TV signals.3. For its business activity, the assessee had approached the authority under the KGST Act for grant of registration certificate as required under Section 7 of the CST Act read with Rule 3(1) of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957. While making the application, it was the specific request of the assessee, that, h...
Manikkam V.V. Vs. Assistant Engineer, Kseb and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-12-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)KLJ334; 2008(1)KLT647
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioner is challenging Ext. P4 order issued by the Additional District Magistrate approving drawal of electric line for giving electric connection to additional respondents 4 and 5 on the ground that ADM does not have the authority to approve alternate route suggested by the parties in the course of proceedings before him.2. I heard counsel appearing for the petitioner, Standing Counsel for KSEB and counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3. It is conceded that Ext. R3(a) sketch produced by respondents 2 and 3 reflect the true state of affairs. The house of the beneficiaries are adjoining properties located beneath the properties of respondents 2 and 3. The line originally proposed was through the boundary of the properties of respondents 2 and 3 and would have been drawn from D to C as shown in the sketch. However, respondents 2 and 3 raised objection stating that the drawal of line in the route proposed by the first respondent would lead to cutting...
Canara Bank Vs. the Central Information Commission and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-11-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Ker225
ORDERS. Siri Jagan, J.1. A nationalised bank, viz., Canara Bank, challenges the order of the Central Information Commission directing the bank to furnish the information requested for by the 2nd respondent employees of the bank. Ext. P8 is the said order.2. The information requested for were the following:(i) Posting/transfer of clerical staff of the Canara Bank to other branches for the period 1-1-2002 to 31-7-2006.(ii) Officials promoted and posted to other branches in Ernakulam district.(iii) Clerical staff transferred in Ernakulam district on temporary basis during the period 1-1-02 to 31-7-06.(iv) Details of appointment/promotion of clerical staff other than mentioned in (i) and (ii) above during 1-1-02 to 31-7-06 in district Ernakulam.(v) Furnish copies of transfer guidelines pertaining to clerical staff during 1-1-02 to 31-7-06. The applicant has sought the aforesaid information as per the pro forma drawn by the (sic) him.The bank seeks to deny furnishing of these informations t...
Thommy Varghese (Died) and ors. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-11-2007
Reported in: (2007)212CTR(Ker)231
H.L. Dattu, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of the order passed by the Kerala Agricultural Tribunal, Kottayam in Agricultural Income-tax Appeal, AITA No. 27 of 2000 dt. 30th Dec, 2005.2. Brief facts are: This appeal is filed under the provisions of the Kerala Agrl. IT Act, 1991 (for the sake of brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'Act') The assessment year in question is 1992-93. The appellants/petitioners before us in this appeal are the legal representatives of late Thommy Varghese. He was in possession and enjoyment of an agricultural land to an extent of 7.99 acres. While he was alive, he did not file any returns under the provisions of the Act. Therefore, the assessing authority had issued the proposition notice, inter alia directing the assessee to file his returns for the assessment year in question. The assessee had filed his objections to the said notice inter alia contending that his agricultural holding is less than 3 hectares and, therefore, he would not come within the purvi...
N.S.S. Hindu College Vs. Chief Eng. and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-11-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Ker19
ORDERC.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Petitioner is challenging demand of electricity charges at commercial tariff under LT-VIIA for the electricity connection given to the canteen attached to the petitioner-college. According to the petitioner, canteen is located in the college premises and is exclusively catering to the needs of the students and staff. Therefore tariff applicable for educational purposes, namely LT-VI A, should be applied is the case of the petitioner. However, learned Standing Counsel for KSEB contended that canteen is run by contractor engaged by petitioner and therefore it is to be charged at commercial tariff. His further contention is that other institutions which are covered along with educational institutions under tariff LT-VI A are reading rooms and libraries and since canteen is not covered by the said entry, petitioner's claim is not tenable. I feel, canteen whether run by educational; institution directly or through contractor cannot be treated as an educatio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »