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.
Jayakumar Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-11-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)KLJ653
K. Thankappan, J.1. The accused in S.C. No. 412 of 2001 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court (trial of Abkari Act Cases), Neyyattinkara is the appellant. He faced trial for the offence punishable under Section 58 of the Abkari Act.2. The prosecution case against the appellant was that on 19-8-1997 while the Assistant Excise Inspector of Amaravila Excise Range was on patrol duty, he found the accused in possession of 5 litres of arrackin ablack jerry can at Vellarada Kudappanamoodu-Kuttappu road near Kuttappu junction, Kovilloor Desom. To prove the case against the accused, the prosecution examined PWs. 1 to 6 and produced Exts.P 1 to P7 as well as MO. 1 can. On the side of the defence, DW.1 was examined, but no documents were produced. After closing the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Denying the allegations levelled against him, the accused stated that the excise officials had foisted the case against him. However, after considering t...
Yesodhari Devi M.G. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-11-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)KLJ799
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Writ Petition was preferred by the appellant herein seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to assign the seniority to the petitioner with effect from 14-02-1989 by extending the benefit of Ext.P4 and to grant all other consequential benefits. She has also sought for a declaration that she is entitled to retain her original seniority with effect from the date of her advice in the light of Ext.P4 government order and also for other consequential reliefs. Learned single Judge found no reason to grant the reliefs prayed for placing reliance on the judgment of this Court in Shaji Lukose v. State of Kerala and Ors. 2007 (1) KIT 679. Learned Government Pleader submitted that the decision which is applicable to this case is Sreekala v. State of Kerala 2007 (1) KLT 903 and not the decision in Shaji's case.2. Petitioner was appointed Staff Nurse in the Health Service Department and she joined duty on 2.5-03-1989. After the lapse of one year she had availed ...
Mayilvahanam Marketing Shoranur Vs. Addl. Sales Tax Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-10-2007
Reported in: (2008)12VST296(Ker)
H.L. Dattu, C.J.1. The common question in all these Writ Petitions and Tax Revision Cases is, whether the dealer who purchases P.V.C. pipes in circumstances in which no Sales Tax was charged under Section 5, is liable to pay tax on the said purchase price under Section 5A of the Act, because the sale of PVC pipes is exempt from payment of Sales Tax by virtue of a notification issued by the State Government in exercise of its power under Section 10 of the Act, in G.O. No. 499/1990. 2. The learned Counsel for the Revenue, Sri. Mohammed Rafiq submitted that the legal issues involved in these petitions are no more debatable in view of two decisions of this Court in The Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law) v. Supreme Boards, Pappinissery, Cannanore (1998) 6 KTR 374 and Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law) v. C.T. Kochouseph (2005) 13 KTR 58 .3. In Supreme Boards' case (supra), this Court has held:Resin is a taxable commodity at the point of first sale in the State. Because of the circum...
V. Padmanabhan and ors. Vs. the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Char ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-10-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)KLJ730
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Extp. P10 order passed by the Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments (Administration) Department dated 10-11-2006 is under challenge in W.P.C. No. 30254 of 2006. Commissioner by that order removed the petitioners therein from the Trustee Board of T.T.K. Devaswom on the ground that they are ineligible to continue as non hereditary trustees in the Board since their appointments were in violation W.P.(C) No. 30254 of 2006(B) Decided on 10-07-2007 of Ext.Pl 1 guidelines date 18-05-2004 issued for the selection of non hereditary trustees for temples under the control of H.R. & C.E. Commissioner has taken the view that evidence produced by the fourth respondent and the report of the Assistant Commissioner would show that the petitioners are disqualified to be appointed as trustees. Consequently a declaration was made to that effect. Further it was ordered that the vacancies should be renotified in accordance with the guidelines and fresh selection be m...
Deepa P. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-10-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)KLJ427
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioner's mother, a school teacher died on 26-3-1975. The petitioner became entitled to draw family pension from 30-4-1998 and was granted such benefit as per Ext.P2 order. However, on the ground that due certificate was produced only at a later point of time, the date of her entitlement to family pension stands, in effect, postponed as per the impugned action. Hence, this writ petition.Petitioner was born on 17-3-1975. She was found eligible for family pension from 30-4-1998, the day immediately following the date on which her elder sister attained the age of 25 years.In terms of Rule 90(7)(c) in Part III K.S.R., the contributory pension will be admissible in the case of unmarried daughter until she attains the age of 25 years or marriage or till she starts earning her livelihood, whichever is earlier.2. The Government issued Ext.P 12 executive order dated 31-8-1998, whereby, unmarried daughters of deceases Government servants are eligible for life...
S. Balamurali Vs. K.V. Vikramanunni
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-09-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Ker280; I(2008)BC664; 2007(3)KLJ112
ORDERPius C. Kuriakose, J.1. The grievance of the petitioner in these two writ petitions, a police constable, the judgment-debtor in two money decrees obtained by the respondent is that under Ext. P3 orders in these cases directing his arrest in execution the Court below has relied solely on Ext. B1 certificate disclosing a total amount of Rs. 8,515/- to hold that he has sufficient means to discharge the liability and that he has wilfully neglected to pay the decree debt. Of course, the learned Munsiff has indicated in the impugned orders that the salary as disclosed by Ext. B1 salary certificate may not be the sole source of income of the petitioner. But the fact remains that the only documentary evidence available before the Court regarding the petitioner's income was the salary certificate. I find that the learned Munsiff has not made any enquiry as to what was the attachable portion of the salary of the petitioner. It is conceded that the petitioner's salary is under attachment in ...
Sheela and anr. Vs. Muraleedharan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-06-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Ker33
ORDERK.T. Sankaran, J.1. The question arising for consideration in this revision is whether minors in whose favour decree for maintenance was passed would be entitled to execute the decree within twelve years of the respective period for which maintenance is due or whether they should file the execution petition before the expiry of three years of their attaining majority as provided in Section 8 of the Limitation Act.2. The petitioners herein are the decree holders. The suit was filed for maintenance. Decree was passed on 31-8-1989. It was a compromise decree. Rs. 75/- per month was allowed to both the petitioners as maintenance. The first petitioner, Sheela, attained majority on 22-12-1996. The second petitioner, Rajesh, attained majority on 18-6-1998. The execution petition was filed on 20-11-2002 for realisation of maintenance from 20-1-1988 to November 2002. Before the executing Court, the respondent judgment debtor contended that the execution petition is barred by limitation. It...
Dr. G. Jaikrishnan Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-06-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ96
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioner, a post graduate with M.D. in Bio-chemistry, was appointed as a Lecturer on provisional basis, following a notification issued by the Principal of the Government Medical College, Kozhikode as avialable in the files. That notification was, obviously, one to provide immediate stop gap appointments awaiting recruitment of regular hands through the Public Service Commission or provisional hands through the Employment Exchange. He joined duty with effect from the forenoon of 17-12-1996. Ext. R3(a) shows that his appointment as a provisional Lecturer is liable to be terminated as soon as 'PSC/Employment' hand joins duty, whichever it earlier and his service was also liable to be terminated at any time without notice. By Ext. R3(b) proceedings, at his request, his service was terminated with effect from the afternoon of 31-7-1997. In that document it is recorded that the petitioner was working as provisional Lecturer (on contract basis). He then jo...
Hubert Peyoli Vs. M. Abusali and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-06-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ136
M. Sasidharan Nambiar, J.1. Plaintiff in O.S. 435 of 1985 on the file of Munsiff Court, Nedumangad is the appellant. Defendants are respondents. Appellant instituted the suit seeking a decree for realisation of Rs. 5518.30 with interest on the principal amount of Rs. 5110/- as the balance amount due on a loan obtained on executing a bond creating a charge over the plaint schedule property. Appellant instituted the suit as O.S. 499 of 1983 before Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram on 8-9-1983. But as per Kerala Civil Court Ordinance 31 of 1983 promulgated on 5-9-1983 and published in Gazette on 6-9-1883, pecuniary jurisdiction of the Munsiff Court was enhanced to Rs. 15000/-. But without taking note of the pecuniary jurisdiction of Munsiff Court pursuant to the ordinance suit was instituted before Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram as the suit was valued at Rs. 10,678.80 inclusive of the interest till that date. In view of the ordinance enhancing the pecuniary jurisdiction of Munsiff Court, as pe...
Sajan J. Menon Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-06-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ793
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. These writ, petitions have been placed before us on a reference made by a learned single Judge of this Court doubting the correctness of a judgment of a learned single Judge in WJP(C) No. 178 of 2005 and the decision of a Division Bench in Mohan v. Public Service Commission 1994(2) KLT 585 in view of the decision of the apex court in Dr. Dinesh Kumar and Ors. v. Motilal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad and Ors. : AIR1985SC1059 . Apex Court in Dr. Dinesh Kumar and Ors. case (supra) was dealing with a case of admission to MBBS Post Graduate Courses in Medical Faculty; in Motilal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad. Court held it would be wholly unjust to grant the admissions to students by assessing their relative merits with reference to the marks obtained by them not at the same qualifying examination where standard or judging would be reasonably uniform but at different qualifying examinations held by different State Governments or Universities where the standard...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »