Kerala Court December 2009 Judgments

George Joseph Vs. Ramachandran

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2010(1)KLT105

ORDERS.S. Satheesachandran, J.1. Concurrent decision rendered by the two courts below that the petitioner, a returned candidate, in the election to the Grama Panchayat has suppressed material particulars of a criminal case he was involved while submitting his nomination paper, disclosure of which was mandated by the rules, and, therefore, his election as a member of the Panchayat is liable to be set aside, is challenged in the revision.2. Petitioner and the respondent contested the Panchayat election held on 26.9.2005 from Ward No. 3 of Balal Grama Panchayat. Petitioner having secured majority of votes than those secured by the respondent, he was declared elected. The respondent challenged the election of the petitioner filing an election petition before the Munsiff Court, Hosdurg contending that he had suppressed material particulars of a criminal case against him while furnishing Form 2A with his nomination paper. Petitioner was involved in a criminal case and facing trial, numbered ...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kumbazha Tourist Home

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2010(1)KLT635

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The question raised in the connected appeals is whether the Tribunal was justified in holding at respondent-assessee is not liable for payment of tax on capital gains on the distribution of assets on the dissolution of the firm. We have heard Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant and Adv. Sri. P. Balakrishnan appearing for the respondent.2. A firm was constituted with four partners to take over 14.25 cents of land and a building thereon for running lodging business by the assessee-firm. The firm was constituted on 1.7.1979 and continued it's business upto the assessment for 1993-94 and dissolved with effect from 1.4.1993. Under the dissolution, the land and buildings brought as capital of the partners went back to the same partners. Even though the firm did not file return for the assessment year 1994-95 declaring capital gains on the dissolution of the firm, the Assessing Officer on getting information initiated proceedings for assessment for...

Francis Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2010(1)KLT1

Antony Dominic, J.1. Petitioners are Judicial Officers serving in the District Center at Pathanamthitta. In this Writ Petition their grievance is regarding non payment of Transfer Grant/Disturbance Allowance, which is also described as Composite Transfer Grant, for the period from 1.11.1999 till 1.6.2005.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that Chapter 19 of the Shetty Commission Report dealt with the recommendation of Allowances, Amenities and Advances. Para 17 contained recommendations regarding Transfer Grant/Disturbance Allowance and the paragraph reads as under:17. Transfer Grant/Disturbance Allowance: Each State has prescribed the rules regarding payment of 'Transfer Grant' for transferred officers. But such rates are in variance with the provisions made by Central Government. Recently (w.e.f. 8.10.1999), Central Government has introduced 'composite Transfer Grant' equivalent to one month's basic pay. Such a 'composite Transfer Grant' is appropriate and simple. Commission...

P. Shamseer S/O. Mohammed Vs. the Sub Inspector of Police,

Court: Kerala

Kurian Joseph, J.1. The writ petition is filed with the following prayer:Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to provide adequate, necessary and meaningful police protection to the person and property of petitioner and his family members.2. Basically, there is a dispute with regard to the tenancy arrangement between the petitioner on the one side and respondents 2 to 4 on the other.3. Finding an element of settlement, we directed the parties to be present before this Court. We also had the assistance of Smt. M.A. Zohra, learned Counsel practising in this Court as Conciliator-cum-Mediator. Thanks to the strenuous efforts taken by the learned conciliator and thanks to the co-operation extended by the parties and their counsel, the parties have arrived at a settlement. The following are the terms of settlement:a) The petitioner has paid the admitted rent dues upto October being Rs. 5,86,500/- to the additional 4th respond...

Babu Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2010(1)KLT230

R. Basant, J.1. Does a detenu under a law providing for preventive detention have a fundamental right to be communicated with the order passed on the representation made by him in exercise of his fundamental right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India ?ii) Does the communication by anyone other than the authority passing the order of the fate of the representation made by the detenu (and not the order as such) infringe such fundamental right of the detenu?iii) Has Ext.P3 representation to the Government received the irreducible minimum of 'a real and proper consideration' which it is entitled to under law when it was rejected by Ext.R1(d) order dated 5.9.2009 which was communicated to the detenu under Ext.R1(b) letter?iv) Is the practice of cryptic one line (nay, one word at times) orders being passed on such representations by the authorities on the basis of notes put up by the subordinates, in tune with the high constitutional values and concern for right to life, personal...

The District Collector, Vs. Abdul Kasim S/O Muhammad

Court: Kerala

A.K. Basheer, J.1. This appeal, which is at the instance of the State is directed against an interim order passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 18671 OF 2009.2. By the impugned order the learned Single Judge has directed the appellants to release respondent's vehicle on depositing a sum of Rs. 25,000/-, if the said amount had not already been deposited by him pursuant to the order passed by the District Collector.3. Sri. Ranjith Thampan, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the learned Single Judge ought to have imposed more stringent conditions while releasing vehicles involved in illegal transportation of sand, in order to ensure that such interim orders work as deterrents especially since degradation of bio-diversity is involved in such offence. He invites our attention to the judgments of the Apex Court in this regard.4. Having heard learned Additional Advocate General and learned Counsel for the respondent we are of the view that, the interim order passed by...

The District Collector, Vs. Sakeer. C. S/O Khader

Court: Kerala

A.K. Basheer, J.1. This appeal, which is at the instance of the State is directed against an interim order passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 19713 OF 2009.2. By the impugned order the learned Single Judge has directed the appellants to release respondent's vehicle to him without insisting for cash deposit or furnishing any security. But it was made clear that the District Collector may impose other conditions.3. Sri. Ranjith Thampan, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the learned Single Judge ought to have imposed some stringent conditions while ordering release of the vehicle which was involved in illegal transportation of sand. According to him, stringent conditions are necessary to prevent recurrence of such violations, especially since degradation of bio-diversity is involved. He invites our attention to the judgments of the Apex Court in this regard.4. Having heard learned Additional Advocate General and learned Counsel for the respondent we are of the ...

A.R. Nagar Service Co-operative Bank Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2010(1)KLT55

S. Siri Jagan, J.1. The common issue raised in these two Writ Petitions is as to whether Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Societies Act') as amended by Amendment Act 1 of 2000, ousts the jurisdiction of the Labour Courts and Industrial Tribunals under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in respect of service matters of workmen of co-operative societies answering the definition of 'dispute' as defined under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the I.D. Act). In W.P.(C) No. 27909/2009, a co-operative society challenges the order by which the Government of Kerala has referred a dispute raised by a workman of the society to the Labour Court, Kozhikode for adjudication under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the proceedings before the Labour Court, pursuant to the reference. In the other Writ Petition, the workman who raised the said dispute seeks to sustain the order of reference and the proceedings befor...

Hashim Vs. University of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2010(1)KLT309

P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.1. Inter-se seniority between the petitioner and the respondents 3 and 4 in the post of Library Assistant under the first respondent University is the dispute involved in this Writ Petition.2. Pursuant to the applications invited by the University for direct recruitment to the post of Library Assistant, the petitioner as well as the respondents 3 and 4 appeared for the written test held on 30.12.1995, followed by the interview on 05.08.1996 and on coming out successful in the process of selection, they were included in the rank list which came into force from 23.8.1996. Pursuant to the orders of appointment issued, the petitioner joined the service as 'Library Assistant' on 5.10.1996, while the 3rd and 4th respondents joined on 3.10.1996 and 30.9.1996 respectively.3. Respondents 3 and 4 who were stated as having a better claim of seniority over the petitioner, apprehending the steps of the University to promote the petitioner to the next higher grade of Techni...

Mani Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

P. Bhavadasan, J.1. Five persons were sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307 and 302 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code. The second accused died during the pendency of the case before the trial court and hence the charge as against him stood abated. Accused Nos. 1, 3 and 5 were acquitted of all the charges. The fourth accused was found guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 and 307 read with Section 149 of IPC and convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Sections 143 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence punishable under Section 147 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under Section 148 IPC, imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for ten years for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. He was also directed to pay an amount of Rs....