Kerala Court August 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.
Joseph Vs. K.V. Ippunny and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-07-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ201
J.B. Koshy, J.1. First appellant in this appeal filed an application for Letters of Administration of Ext. A4 Will dated 10-2-1989 executed by his mother Kochumariyam making his sister and two other brothers as defendants. Appellant herein who was made as additional fourth defendant filed an objection stating that Kochumariyam has executed a Will dated 1-3-1987 in his favour and he produced a certified copy of the same as Ext. B4. It is contended that he is the son-in-law of the said Kochumariyam and she was looked after by him for many years prior to her death. Appellant's wife, first defendant, who is the sister of the propounder also filed similar objection. Since objections were filed, the application was converted as a suit. Propounder of the Will examined four witnesses including himself. All witnesses other than the plaintiff deposed against his pleadings.2. First respondent/plaintiff entered the box as PW1. He deposed that Ext. A4 is the Will executed by later Kochumariyam, his...
Jayaprasad Vs. Rejimon Philip
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-06-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ1272
J.B. Koshy, J.1. The appellant met with an accident on 30.8.1991 while he was riding a motor cycle and he suffered very serious injury. He approached the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal contending that due to negligent driving of the scooter which came in a rash and negligent manner hit him and the above scooter was insured by respondent No. 2, insurance company. He claimed a compensation of Rs. 4,93,700. The Claims Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 2,02,700. The accident occurred solely due to negligence of the respondent No. 1 and his vehicle was at the time of accident duly insured by respondent No. 2. Against the finding of negligence on the part of respondent No. 1 as the cause of the accident and coverage of insurance, no appeal is filed by the respondents. The only question that is to be considered in this case is regarding the quantum of compensation.2. It is contended by the appellant that his right leg below knee was amputated due to accident. This is not disputed. The Tribun...
P.T. Moidu Vs. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-03-2007
Reported in: 2009ACJ1101; AIR2008Ker43; 2008(1)KLJ378
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Can insurance company be exonerated from liability to pay compensation merely because driver who was driving a commercial vehicle was not having a badge? Learned single Judge noticed two divergent views expressed by a Division Bench of this Court. Hence, the matter was referred to the Division Bench. In Govindakutty Nair v. Gopalakrishnan 2000 (1) KLT 224 : 2000 AIHC 575 a Division Bench of this Court held that requirement of driver's badge is necessary to drive a transport vehicle and if the driver is not having a badge at the time of accident, insurance company is exonerated from liability. The Division Bench referred to the decision of the Apex Court in United India Insurance Company Limited v. Gian Chand and Ors. : AIR1997SC3824 and Rukmani and Ors. v. New India Assurance Company and Ors. : (1998)9SCC160 . Another Division Bench of this Court in Ramachandran v. Unnikrishnan 2006 (2) KLTSN 15, Case No. 20, held that mere absence of a badge to drive a commercial vehi...
V.C. Deepamol Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ786
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The 4th respondent was appointed as an Upper Primary School Assistant in 1995 in the School of which the 3rd respondent is the Manager, in a regular vacancy. That was approved. She was, thereafter, promoted as an High School Assistant.2. By Ext. PI, petitioner was appointed as a UPSA in the leave vacancy from 1-6-1998 to 31-3-1999.3. In the academic year 1998-1999, Higher Secondary Course was sanctioned for the school.4. G.O.(MS.) No. 162/98/G. Edn. dated 13-5-1998 laid down the conditions subject to which the Higher Secondary Courses were granted. The 3rd respondent Manager appointed the petitioner as an Higher Secondary School Teacher (Mathematics) with effect from the afternoon of 18-9-1998 as per Ext.P2.5. Issue arose among the petitioner and the 4th respondent as to who among them was entitled to be appointed as HSST (Mathematics). That led to different proceedings before the statutory authorities, as also before this Court. By, Ext. R4(b) judgmen...
Dr. G. Muraleedhara Kurup Vs. Mahatma Gandhi University and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-02-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ485; 2008(2)KLT811
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner is a teacher in Bio-chemistry in the School of Bio-sciences in the Mahatma Gandhi University. The third respondent is a teacher in the School of Chemical Sciences in that University. The petitioner challenges Ext. P10 decision of the University, promoting the third respondent as Professor with effect from 20-11-1995 under the carer advancement scheme of UGC and Ext. P13, which apparently evidences that the Vice Chancellor had decided not to interfere with Ext. P10 decision, on the ground that the promotion given to the third respondent is on the basis of recommendations of a duly constituted selection committee as per the UGC guidelines.2. Before coming to the rival contentions touching the merits of the claims, it needs to be considered whether the claim of the petitioner could be treated as a competing claim to that of the third respondent and whether the petitioner has a right to challenge the promotion of the third respondent. The th...
P.S. Sadasivan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-02-2007
Reported in: (2008)13VST481(Ker)
ORDERH.L. Dattu C.J.1. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in these revision petitions, they are clubbed together, heard and disposed of by this common order.2. In these revision petitions, the petitioner calls in question the legality or otherwise of the order passed by the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T. A. Nos. 476 to 481 of 1997 dated February 11, 2003. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has rejected the claim of the petitioner for levying reduced rate of tax on inter-State sales as provided under Section 8(2A) of the Act.3. The facts in a nutshell are as follows:The petitioner is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the KGST Act' and 'the CST Act'). The petitioner is a small-scale industrial unit engaged in the manufacture and sale of tread rubber.4. In these revision petitions we are concerned with the assessment years 1988-89, 1989-90 and 1990-91...
Bhahuleyan Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-02-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)CTLJ292(Ker); 2007(3)KLJ120
ORDERR. Basant, J.1. Does the dictum in Tarun Bhargava v. State of Harvana 2003 (3) KLT 397 Punjab & Haryana as approved by Honourable Justice K.R. Udayabhanu in the unreported decision in Shibi Francis v. State of Kerala represent the correct law applicable in Kerala now? Does the decision in Shibi Francis need reconsideration? These questions are to be sorted out in this Crl.M.C.2. These Crl. M.C.s are directed against a common order passed by the learned Magistrate. The rival contestants had claimed release of a vehicle in their favour under Section 451 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate by the impugned common order directed that the vehicle be handed over to the registered owner of the vehicle in preference to the person who claimed himself to be the present owner respectively. I shall hereafter refer to them as the registered owner and present owner. The present owner claimed rights from a finance company, I shall hereafter refer to them as the financier, who had admittedly advanced a...
Usha Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-01-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)KLJ879
ORDERR. Basant, J.1. The petitioner is the owner of a stage carriage, bearing No. KL-2U/730. According to the petitioner, theft of the said vehicle took place as early as on 11/12-7-2005. A crime was registered at the Kilikolloor Police Station as Crime No. 268 of 2005. Investigation is in progress. Initially there was no accused shown. In the course of investigation, altogether four persons have been arrayed as accusedby now. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 have been arrested. Investigation has led the police to the conclusion that the stolen vehicle had been entrusted to accused Nos. 3 and4. That information was allegedly available to the police when the first accused was arrested as early as on 11-11-2005. But accused 3 and 4 have not been arrested yet nor has the vehicle been seized yet.2. The petitioner, the victim of the crime, laments before this Court that no proper and efficient investigation is being conducted by the Investigator. The Sub Inspector of Police Kilikolloor police station i...
Dr. P.K. Radhakrishnan Vs. Mahathma Gandhi University and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-01-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ482
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioner entered service of the M.G. University as a Lecturer on 4-12-1987 in the faculty of School of Chemical Sciences. The third respondent joined the service of the University as Lecturer in the Department of Basic Medical Sciences on 20-2-1988.2. On the basis of the notification No. 1726/89/All (1) Admn. Dated 4-1-1990, the University, through its Registrar, invited application for appointment to, among other posts, one post of Reader in Bio-chemistry in the School of Basic Medical Sciences. The Selection Committee found Dr. P. Harikumar as the one entitled to be selected and recommended his name for appointment. He was the only person who was selected in the selection by interview held on 27-2-1991. That selection of Dr. P. Harikumar was challenged by the third respondent by filing O.P. No. 3080 of 1991. Though there was an interlocutory order in that case on C.M.P. No. 5385 of 1991 directing that Dr. P. Harikumar is not to be admitted to the p...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Rekha
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-01-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ886; [2007(115)FLR1106]
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Appeal is filed by the insurance company against the award of compensation by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. Contentions raised are three in number. First contention is that Rs. 4,000 was taken as the monthly income without any basis. He was a professional driver. The amount of Rs. 4,000 assessed by the Commissioner needs no interference as commercial heavy vehicle driver will get more than Rs. 4,000 a month. In any event, it is a finding of fact and no substantial question of law arises. Second contention is with regard to assessment of loss of earning capacity. Commissioner has assessed the same on the basis of medical certificate. Index factor was fixed considering the undisputed age of the claimant. It is submitted that the Commissioner has awarded penalty to be paid by insurance company, if the amount is not paid within the time prescribed. It is well settled law that penalty is not payable by the insurance company but by the employer as held by the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›