Kerala Court September 2007 Judgments

State of Kerala Vs. Pongampara Leela and anr.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ802

ORDERHarun-Ul-Rashid, J.1. The State has come up in revision against the order of the Taluk Land Board, Quilandy dated 15-2-1996. The Taluk Land Board in the order dated 30-8-1980 determined the excess land to be surrendered by Sri. Pongampra Varkey Devassia, the declarant, and directed him to surrender 12.02 acres of land as excess land in his possession. After the remand order dated 15-2-1983 in C.R.P. No. 2844/1980, the Taluk Land Board again considered the matter afresh and by order dated 24-5-1984 re-fixed the excess land to be surrendered as 8.47 acres of land. The assessee unsuccessfully challenged the said order before the High Court in C.R.P. No. 1916/1984 and thereafter in Civil Appeal No. 4152/1995 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The order of the Taluk Land Board dated 24-5-1984 has thus become final. Subsequently when proceedings are initiated by the authorities for taking over the excess land as ordered above, two applications under Section 85(8) of the Kerala Land Refor...

State by Sub Inspector of Police Vs. Satish Shetty and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: II(2008)DMC132; ILR2008(2)Kar1432; 2008(5)KLJ50; 2008(2)KCCR929; 2008(3)AIRKarR96; 2008CriLJ2490; 2008(3)AICLR396(DB)

Manjula Chellur, J.1. This is yet another case involving a young lady who has left this world at the age of 25 years leaving behind a tender aged son by name Rakesh that too when she was pregnant of 20 weeks. The State has come up with this appeal challenging the judgment and Order of acquittal, wherein the respondents were tried for offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and also Sections 498A and 304B of IPC.2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:It is not in dispute that the deceased-Rekha was affectionately called as Baby by her kith and kin married the 1st respondent/accused on 5.6.1991. The relationship inter se between the respondents i.e. accused No. 1 being the son of accused Nos. 2 and 3, and accused No. 4 being the son-in-law of accused Nos. 2 and 3 is not in dispute. The relationship of deceased-Rekha with P. W. 6-mother, P.W. 7-first cousin and P.Ws. 9 and 19-maternal uncles is no t in dispute. It is also not in dispute th...

A.T. George and ors. Vs. P. Saralakumari and anr.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ706

V. Giri, J.1. Common questions arise in all these writ petitions filed by the State of Kerala, under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging identically worded orders passed by the Kerala Lok Ayuktha, in complaints preferred by the contesting respondents herein. The facts involved in all these cases are also so similar, as could be called as identical. Therefore, all these writ petitions have been heard and are disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, W.P.(C) No. 3565/07 is taken as the leading case.2. Nine police constables of the District Armed Reserve, Thiruvananthapurarn, were dismissed by the Governor of Kerala. They were dismissed as per G.O.(Rt) No. 1041/74 dated 26-6-1974, after the Governor of Kerala was personally satisfied under the proviso to Article 311 of the Constitution of India that in the interest of the security of the State, it is not expedient to hold an enquiry in the case of the said 9 policemen of the District Armed Reserve, Thiruva...

Spl. Dy. Collector (L.A.), Kseb and anr. Vs. Channadiyil Abdul Gafoor ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(1)KLJ50; 2008(1)KLT115

Kurian Joseph, J.1. Whether a sale deed executed three years prior to the publication of Section 4(1) notification under the Land Acquisition Act can be taken into consideration for the purpose of fixation of market value by the reference court is one of the main questions to be considered in this case.2. Market value is the price, which the owner of a property willing and not obliged to sell it might reasonably accept for it from one of a number of willing purchasers who are not obliged to buy it and with whom he has been bargaining openly for its value and purchase. Unconscionable bargains, in view of the requirement of the owner either to sell his property or for the buyer to buy a land at any cost are to be excluded. The Kerala Land Acquisition Manual, in the prescribed guidelines for the Land Acquisition Officers has provided that in fixing the market value of the acquired land all the sale deeds executed within a period of 3 years prior to the publication of the Section 3(1) noti...

V.P. Kochagasty Vs. the Chairman, Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an appeal preferred from the order dated.16.12.2002 passed by the CDRF, Ernakulam in OP.163/02. The appellants herein filed the complaint in OP.163/02 claiming compensation for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party (respondent herein) in collecting service charges for three outstation cheques submitted to the bank for collection/ encashment. The lower forum dismissed the complaint in the said OP.163/02 on the ground that the opposite party bank has proceeded only in accordance with the circular issued by the bank with respect to the collection of charges for rendering service to the customers for forwarding their outstation cheques for collection and encashment. The lower forum has also directed the complainant to pay cost of Rs.250/- to the opposite party bank for unnecessarily preferring the complaint in OP.163/02. Aggrieved by the said order the present appeal is preferred. 2. We heard the appellant who appeared i...

Sujith S/O Kalesan Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008CriLJ824

J.B. Koshy, J.1. Doubting the correctness of the decision reported in Kuriakose Chacko v. State 1950 KLT 628 : 1951 (52) Cri LJ 470, a learned single Judge of this Court referred this Revision Petition before the Division Bench. Before going into the question of law involved in the above decision, we may consider the facts of the case. Petitioner is the 11th accused in SC No. 1 of 2006 of the Sessions Court, Alappuzha. Charge was framed against 12 accused on 6-8-2007 after their case was committed to the Sessions Court by the Magistrate's Court. In the charge-sheet accused 1 to 4, 6 and 7 were charge sheeted for offences punishable under Section 302, IPC. Accused 5 and 8 to 13 were charge sheeted for the offence under Section 212 read with Section 34, IPC. This revision petition is filed by the 1lth accused. In the charge sheet the allegations against 1lth accused are mainly contained in paragraphs 32, 33 and 34 which are as follows:32. Thirtysecondly, that you all A10, Al1 and A12 kno...

M/S. Aima Manpower Services Vs. Lincy Sam

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated.18.5.2007 passed by the CDRF, Ernakulam in CC.No.48/07. The complaint in CC.No.48/07 was preferred by the complainant/Respondent as against the appellant as opposite party seeking refund of Rs.26400/- which was remitted by her as Registration fee with the opposite party for getting job placement Nurse in the U.K. The case of the complainant is that there occurred change in circumstance for getting VISA from the U.K.Government. It is admitted by the opposite party as DW1 that there occurred some change in the circumstance due to change made by the U.K.Government in their Labour and Laws and U.K.Government has made some restrictions regarding issuance of VISA to nursing personal. It is an admitted fact that category of nurses has been removed from the list of skill shortage occupation with respect to VISA formalities. This circumstance would make it clear that it was not so easy as before for nurses...

New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Ponnamma Thomas and anr.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009ACJ1331; AIR2008Ker4

J.B. Koshy, J.1. The appellant Insurance Company challenges the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. A 55 years old fish vendor died leaving his widow and daughter in a motor accident. They filed application for compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- The matter was placed before the Lok Adalath and in the Adalath the matter was settled on 23-1-2002. It is stated in the award that after discussion with the parties the matter was settled in terms and an award was passed for Rs. 1,85,000/- in favour of the petitioners. Thereafter an I.A. was filed before the Tribunal contending that here was some calculation error in the award and the Tribunal reviewed the award passed in the Lok Adalath and passed a fresh award for Rs. 2,31,000/-.2. The Tribunal noticed that here was calculation error and fixing 11 as the multiplier, compensation was recalculated. It is also submitted that under the second schedule, only 8 can be the multiplier, considering the age of the deceased. In any event t...

K. Mohandas Nayak and ors. Vs. Kumbala Grama Panchayat

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2008Ker5; 2008(1)KarLJ509

ORDERK.M. Joseph, J.1. Petitioners are aggrieved by the insistence by the respondent Panchayat to execute an agreement on stamp paper by calculating the amount of stamp duty at five per cent of the total amount of rent for the period of three years. Case of the petitioners is that they are conducting business for several years and they have been called upon as part of renewal of the licences, to execute agreement on stamp paper at five per cent for the entire period of the licence. According to them, they are licensees and, therefore, they contend that they need not execute agreement for the exorbitant amount demanded by the Panchayat. Instead, they would contend that the stamp paper need only be for Rs. 50/-. Alternatively, it is their case that even if it is a lease, the demand made by the Panchayat is unsustainable, in view of Article 33 of the Schedule to the Kerala Stamp Act. Article 33 of the Schedule in so far as it is pertinent, is extracted below:33. Lease--including an underl...

Rajesh Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2007(3)KLJ676

J.B. Koshy, J.1. Appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant was the first accused. He was alleged to have killed his mother and sister. Since appellant was financially not able to engage a lawyer, State appointed a lawyer before the trial court and this Court under the legal aid scheme. As per the final report, police charged originally accused, his mother Chandrika and father of the accused under Section 302, 306 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After perusing the records, court charged the appellant alone under Section 302 IPC as mother, original A2, died and it was recorded as abated. The allegation of the prosecution was that appellant Rajesh (A1), his mother Chandrika (A2), father of the appellant (A3) and deceased Raji, sister of the appellant were residing in House No. A.P. X/506 of Anad Village. Father used to abuse ...