Kerala Court March 2009 Judgments
Ramachandran Nair J. and ors. Vs. Lebba Kunju Ameer Hamsa
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-31-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)KLJ59
Pius C. Kuriakose, J.1. Under challenge in this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution initiated by the landlord, is Ext. P8 order of the District Court, Kollam setting aside Ext. P7 order passed by the Munsiff, Kollam in E.P. No. 52/2007 in RCP. No. 5/1996 directing delivery of the building scheduled to RCP. No. 5/1996 to the petitioner/landlord. It was very extensive submissions which were addressed before us be Sri Subhashchandra Bose, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri V. Chitambarash, learned senior counsel for the tenant/respondent. Sri Subhashchandra Bose submitted that as an executing court, the duty of that court was only to execute the order of eviction. In this context, Sri Subhashchandra Bose would place reliance on the judgment of this Court in Velavudhan v. Addl. Dist. Court 1996 (2) KLT 684. Learned Counsel submitted that an order of eviction under Section 11(2) had been finally passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CRP. No. 2611/2000. That jud...
Tag this Judgment!Saranya P.S. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-31-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)KLJ290
Harun-Ul-Rashid, J.1. The petitioner is an 8th standard student in the Government V.H.S.S. Desamangalam at the time of filing this writ petition. The Government introduced the subject 'information Technology' in Standard VIE and IX from the academic year 2003-04 onwards as a compulsory subject in High schools as part of secondary education. Ext.P2 is the order issued by the Government of Kerala introducing the said subject on the recommendation of the State Curriculum Committee.'2. The counsel for the Petitioner Sri. R. Surendran contended that since it is a compulsory subject introduced, it is the duty of the Government to provide necessary infrastructure like setting up of adequate computer laboratories for each school, creation of posts of adequate qualified teachers/instructors and allotting sufficient time for teaching without disturbing the other subjects which are also part of the curriculum. According to the petitioner, it was not fair on the part of the Government to burden th...
Tag this Judgment!Chinnaswamy S. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-31-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)KLJ511
Thomas P. Joseph, J.1. Appellant/Plaintiff challenges dismissal of the suit for a declaration that he is not liable to pay the amount demanded by respondent No. 5, Tahasildar (Revenue Recovery) pursuant to notice No. NK.20624/94-A dated 12/1994 or any other amount to the respondents and a consequential injunction to restrain the respondents from recovering such amount from him pursuant to the said notice.2. Appellant is an A Class PWD contractor. It is not disputed that he was entrusted with the work of two units of quarters, one for Deputy Range Officer, Thekkady and the other, for the Forest guards, Thekkady as per separate agreements. Building materials such as cement and steel were entrusted to the appellant on 26-09-1987. Appellant states that though he had constructed the quarters for Deputy Range Officer partly, it could not be completed as the respondents did not provide him with route permit for transportation of cement and steel through forest area and hence he surrendered bu...
Tag this Judgment!Asiya Vs. Hameed
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-31-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Ker163
C.T. Ravikumar, J.1. The appellant herein was the respondent and the respondent herein was the petitioner in O.P. No. 236 of 2000 on the file of the Family Court. Manjeri. The subject matter of the controversy in this appeal is regarding the parentage of one Irfana Thasni, the daughter born to the appellant.2. The facts of the case, in succinct, are as follows:The appellant and the respondent belong to Muslim community. Their marriage was solemnised on 2-4-1986. Their first child faced instantaneous death on delivery and then two more children were born in their wedlock. In the year 1996, the respondent/petitioner went to Saudi Arabia to fend for himself and his family. He came back to his native place in May, 1996 and again went back to Saudi Arabia in September, 1996. However, bitter experiences were in store for him there and also at home. While working at Saudi Arabia, the appellant was arrested for working without the required documents. His Passport was impounded by the police an...
Tag this Judgment!Paristhithi Samrakshana Sangham Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-30-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)KLJ161
Kurian Joseph, J.1. This is a public interest litigation filed by the Paristhithi Sarrirakshana Sangham, mainly with the following two prayers:i. To issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to conduct sand audit as contemplated under Section 29 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 in respect of Periyar River forthwith, before allowing sand mining in the said river;ii. To issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to allot any Kadavus within 500 meters from any irrigation works as contemplated under Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation Act, 2003.2. When the writ petition came up for admission it was brought to our notice that sand audit as required under Section 29 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 has not been conducted since the last five years. The Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulatio...
Tag this Judgment!Reghu Varma K. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-30-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Ker155; 2009(2)KLJ119
Antony Dominic, J.1. The prayers In this writ petition are to quash Exts. P2 and P3 notifications issued by the 1st respondent appointing respondents 4 and 5 as Presidents of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Kottayam and Wynad respectively. Petitioner also seeks a declaration that he is eligible to be appointed as the President of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum based on his ranking in Ext. PI Panel.2. In December, 2006, in terms of Section 10 of the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') Rule 7(2) of the Kerala Consumer Protection Rules 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules 2005'), the 2nd respondent invited applications for filling up the posts of President of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (CDRF) at Kottayam and Wynad, In response to the said notification, among others, the petitioner submitted his application. As per Section 10(1A) of the Act, the candidates were interviewed by a Selection Committee consisting of the President of the State...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Riswana Begam Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-30-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ2758
K.T. Sankaran, J.1. The petitioner is the wife of Abu Backer Bin Abdulla, S/o. Abdullah, Jalan Manjindia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, who has been detained as per Ext. P. 1 order of detention dated 31-5-2008, issued in exercise of the powers conferred on the Government of Kerala by Section 3(1)(i) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'COFEPOSA Act'). The writ petition is filed to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus to the respondents to produce the detenue before this Court and to set him at liberty. There is also a prayer for issue of a writ of certiorari to quash Ext. P1 order of detention.2. In Ext. P2 grounds of detention, the following allegations are made against the detenue. On 10-4-2008 the detenue arrived at the International Terminal of the Airport at Karipur at about 8.00 a.m. by Srilankan airlines flight UL 169 from Colombo. The officers of the directorate of revenue Intelligence, Calicut, examined the tr...
Tag this Judgment!Shahul Hameed and anr. Vs. Kerala Public Service Commission and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-27-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)KLJ398
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioners are included in a ranked list for the post of Lower Division Clerk in various Departments in Kannur District. It came into force on 1.4.2006. They are ranked as supplemental 57 (Muslim) and supplemental 59 (Muslim) respectively in Ext. P1. Contending that even before the expiry of the ranked list on 31.3.2009, the Public Service Commission has issued a fresh notification, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking to issue appropriate direction to the respondents to issue advice memos to the candidates in Ext.P1 ranked list against vacancies of Lower Division Clerks in various departments in Kannur District with respect to the vacancies which are reported and pending after 31.12,2008 and before the actual publication of the new ranked list.2. It is pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that as per Ext.P2 interim order in Writ Petition No. 37503/2008, directions were issued to report available vacancies of L.D.C. in v...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Sulaikha Clay Mines
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-26-2009
Reported in: [2009]184TAXMAN42(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Two questions are raised by the revenue in the appeal filed by them against the order of the Tubunal confirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) whereunder disallowances made under Sections 40(b) and 40A(2) of the Income Tax Act by the assessing officer are cancelled. We have heard standing counsel appearing for the appellant and counsel appearing for the respondent assessee.2. The assessee is a partnership firm consisting of nine partners of which five are ladies. In the course of assessment the assessing officer noticed that the assessee has paid salary to other partners treating each and every partner as working partner. On enquiry the assessing officer found that four partners are residing in far away places from place of business of the firm. The firm was engaged in mining of clay at a place near Trivandrum. However, these four partners are regularly residing in Alleppey where the firm does not have any branch of its or business operations. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Swiss Times and Electronics
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-26-2009
Reported in: [2009]317ITR291(Ker); [2009]185TAXMAN42(Ker)
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The connected appeals arise from the order of the Tribunal dismissing an appeal and cross-appeal pertaining to the assessment of the very same assessee. Assessment was one completed under Section 158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, after search conducted in the residential premises of the partner of the assessee-firm and after conducting survey in the business premises of the assessee on the same day. In first appeal, the assessee contested the validity of the assessment under Section 158BC and the additions on the merits. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal by holding that the assessment should have been made under Section 158BD as the search was not pursuant to warrant issued in the name of the assessee-firm. When the Department filed an appeal against this order before the Tribunal the assessee filed cross-appeal to contest the matter on the merits. The Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and conse...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »