Kerala Court April 2008 Judgments

The District General Manager, Telecom District Office, B.S.N.L.Ltd., K ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT No representation from both sides. Dismissed. L.C.R. not to be returned....

New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Represented by Its Divisional Manager Vs. ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated 31.1.2005 passed by the CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram in OP.No.454/02 which was filed by the respondent as complainant against the appellant as opposite party claiming the insurance amount on the strength of the policy by name Pravasi Suraksha Kudumba Arogya Scheme. The complainants husband undergone a bye-pass surgery at Amrita Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre, Cochin and incurred a sum of Rs.1,00.402/- for the treatment. The complainant preferred the insurance claim. But the same was repudiated by the opposite party/insurance company by relying on the exclusion Clause VII(1). But the Forum below accepted the case of the complainant and thereby passed the impugned order directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as insurance amount with interest @ 9% and a cost of Rs.2,000/. Aggrieved by the said order the present appeal is filed by the opposite party/insurance company...

L.R. Radhakrishnan Vs. the Joint Registrar of Co-op. Socy. (Gen) Allep ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(2)KLJ65

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioner, the president of the elected committee of the third respondent society, challenges Ext. P7 issued by the first respondent on 24-10-2007 appointing the second respondent administrator under Section 33(1) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, the 'Act', for short, on the ground that the committee has lost the quorum prescribed by Clause 15.6 of its bye-laws, following the arrest of a committee member Sri. Babychan in connection with a murder case and the committee had not met after 7-4-2007 which was the last valid meeting of the committee.2. The bye-laws of the society provide for a committee with nine members. Following the election on 15-12-2003, five persons were elected to the committee and they took charge on that day. A copy of the bye-laws is placed before me during arguments and put to the parties. Clause 15.6 of the bye-laws reads as follows:15.6 The Board of Directors shall meet, once in every month as often as necessary ...

Anitha Bruse Vs. State of Kerala,

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(2)KLJ170; 2008(2)KLT857

V.K. Mohanan, J.1. Hopefully pointing out the grievance of the petitioner regarding the alleged illegal detention of her husband namely Sri.Bruce.S.Pothanikkatt, Keerambara, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the above writ petition invoking the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The main prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition is to issue a writ of habeas corpus commanding the respondents to produce the body of the aforesaid person- the husband of the petitioner before this Court and to set him at liberty forthwith. It is also prayed to declare that the detention of her husband under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (Act 34 of 2007) (hereinafter referred to for short as 'the Act' only) is violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India as the procedural safeguards have been violated.2. The allegations in the writ petition as its original form are as follows:According ...

Achuthan V. and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(2)KLJ200

V. Giri, J.1. Common issues arise for consideration in these writ petitions. Therefore, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Since the pleadings are complete in W.P. (C) No. 24264/07 and notice has been taken out by publication as well, I will refer to the said writ petition, as the leading case.The petitioners commenced service as Head Constables, having been appointed pursuant to a Special Recruitment. They were advised on 23-6-1980 and after completion of training they joined duty. They were included in the select list for promotion to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector of Police, after being considered by the Departmental Promotion Board. They were promoted on a regular basis. They were promoted as Sub Inspectors by Ext.P5 series orders and their probation was declared as per Ext.P6 series orders.2. While so, Ext.P7 range-wise seniority list as on 1-1-2003 was published on 9-11-2004. The same was finalised under Ext.P8. According to the ...

M.A. Muhammed Kunju Vs. Biju S/O. Sainudeen and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(2)KLT833

Harun-Ul-Rashid, J.1. The Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers:i) To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, direction or order, calling for the records leading to Exht.P1 to P3 and P5 and quashing the same.ii) To declare that the general power of the Wakf Tribunal under Section 83 of the Wakf Act is not derogatory to the specific powers of the Wakf Board under Sections 69 to 71 of the Wakf Act.2. The petitioner is the President of Kollakadavu Juma-ath. Ext.P5 interim order passed by the Wakf Tribunal, Kollam is under challenge in this Writ Petition. As per Ext.P5 order, the Tribunal directed the parties to maintain status quo till the matter is heard on merits and appropriate decision taken on the application for interim injunction. The dispute is between the petitioner and respondents 1 and 2 who are the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 20 of 2007 on the file of the Wakf Tribunal, Kollam. Ext.P2 is the plaint originally filed before the Munsiff's Court, Chengannur an...

George Joseph and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(2)KLJ196

K. Padmanabhan Nair, J.1. Petitioners are agriculturists of the Villages of Erattupetta, Thalappalam, Bharanganam, Kanjirappally, Kadanad and Kondoor within the Meenachil and Kanjirappally Taluks, Kottayam District. According to them, they are aggrieved by the action of the respondents 4 and 5 for acquisition of the land, for the proposed Angamali-Erumeli Broad-Gauge Railway line. A Government of India Enterprises, by name RITES, had conducted Engineering-cum-Traffic survey for the proposed Broad-Gauge railway line between Angamali and Erumeli, via. Muvattupuzha, and prepared a report and plan. The case of the petitioners is that respondents have taken a decision to accept Alternative I proposal as against Alternative IV proposal. According to the petitioners if Alternative I proposal is accepted, that will not serve any purpose and it will upset the ecology of the land. It is also averred that various Panchayats have also raised objection against the accepting of Alternative No. I pro...

Nataraj Gownder S. Vs. Registrar and Dy. Director of Dairy Devt. Dept.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(2)KLJ211

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The committee of the second respondent society consisted of nine members. On 27-11-2007, an urgent meeting of that committee was held at 5 p.m. to accept the resignation letters of the petitioners, who are 2 in number and of respondents 4 and 5. Ext.P15 will show that respondents 4 and 5 had written to the President that they are withdrawing their resignations. The committee accepted such withdrawal, going by Ext.P15. It is not in dispute that another member G. Veluswamy Gownder had tendered his resignation on 30-11-2007 and the committee accepted it on 9-10-2008.2. The resignation of the petitioners and the aforesaid Veluswamy, not being in dispute,, the number of members of the committee is reduced from 9 to 6, which is sufficient to sustain the committee, going by the quorum rule.3. According to the petitioners, respondents 4 and 5 having tendered their resignations, they were not entitled to withdraw such resignations since, in terms of the Explana...

thevan Ayyappan Vs. Kottappady East Service Co-op. Bank Ltd.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(2)KarLJ688

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioners are members of the first respondent society. According to them, the committee that was in office lost quorum on 27-3-2007 and the society came to be managed by an administrative committee which decided to conduct election on 20-4-2008. It is the allegation of the petitioners that the committee that lost quorum on 27-3-2007 had, while in office, decided to admit 650 persons as members, however that, no amount towards share value was remitted by those persons until that committee ceased to be in officer on 27-3-2007. This writ petition is filed challenging the inclusion of those persons in the voters' list as members eligible to vote.2. A reading of Sections 16, 18, and 19 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 would show that membership depends upon the decision of a committee to admit a person as a member of the society. Such membership does not depend upon payments to the society in respect of membership. The use of the words 'appl...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Binoy Mathai

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2008)219CTR(Ker)369; [2009]311ITR226(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The reference case arises out of the order of the Tribunal disposing of the respondent/assessee's appeal against the assessment under Section 158BC of the IT Act for the block period 1st April, 1985 to 27th Oct., 1985 (sic-1995). A search was conducted in the premises of the assessee who is a medical practitioner, on 27th Oct., 1985 (sic-1995). Based on the materials gathered, assessment was made for the entire block period which included income assessable for the asst. yr. 1995-96. In the appeal filed by the assessee, the Tribunal noticed that the time for filing return for the asst. yr. 1995-96 was extended by the CBDT till 31st Oct., 1995 and therefore the assessee had time to file return for the asst. yr. 1995-96 as on the date of search. He therefore, allowed the assessee's claim by deleting from the income assessed for the block period so much of the income returned by the assessee and assessed for the year 1995-96 by granting the benefit of Section 1...