Kerala Court July 2009 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.
Prasanth Kumar Vs. C.i. of Police and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-22-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ4793
ORDERK.T. Sankaran, J.1. Accused Nos. 13 (Prasanth Kumar) and 14 (Ismail) in Crime No. 31 of 2008 of Thrikkakkara Police Station have filed B.A. Nos. 3192 of 2009 and 3069 of 2009 respectively, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking bail. They are in judicial custody since 14-12-2008 and 17-1-2009 respectively.2. The offences alleged against the accused persons in the case are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 324, 307 and 120-B read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act.3. According to the prosecution, Accused Nos. 1, 4, 5 and 9 are absconding and Accused Nos. 6,7 and 8 died in an encounter in Jammu, while they tried to cross the border.4. The prosecution case is that the accused persons hatched a criminal conspiracy to assassinate Abdul Rahim alias K.M.R. Guru, who was running a Spiritual Palace at Pookkadasseri. It is alleged that a section of the Muslims believe that the ideologies of K.M.R. Guru and his...
Regional Director, Esi Corporation Vs. P. Asokan
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-22-2009
Reported in: (2010)ILLJ473Ker
V. Ramkumar, J.1. In this appeal filed under Section 82(2) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short), the Employees' State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter called 'the ESI Corporation'), challenges the order dated November 26, 2004 passed by the Employees Insurance Court (EI Court for short), Kollam allowing the application under Sections 75 to 77 of the Act filed by the respondent/employer and holding that the ESI Corporation has failed to establish that Mas Hotel run by the respondent is a 'factory', within the meaning of Section 2(12) of the Act and that the respondent-employer is not liable to pay contribution under the Act.The facts leading to the impugned order can be summarised as follows:(A) On January 16, 1997, three Inspectors of the appellant/Corporation visited the Mas Hotel together with the restaurant and annexe building situated near the Chettikulangara Temple, Thiruvananthapuram. A head count of the employees taken sho...
Chellamma and ors. Vs. Kerala State Electricity Board and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-20-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ34
V. Ramkumar, J.1. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 321 of 1991 on the file of the Sub Court, Kottay am are the appellants in this appeal. The said suit was one for realisation of a sum of Rs. 75,000/- as damages.2. The case of the plaintiffs can be summarised as follows:The 1st plaintiff is the widow and plaintiffs 2 to 5 are the children of one Sivaraman who died on 17.01.1990 due to electric shock from the link-pipe on the 11 K.V transformer installed in the rubber estate of one Pazhayaparambil Hajiyar situated by the side of Pattimattom - Poothakuzhy road. The said Sivaraman was going for work along the said road at about 7.30 a.m. on 17.01.1990. When he reached near the transformer, he saw one Abdul Salam crying for help as the latter was seen trapped near the link-pipe at the bottom of the transformer. Seeing Abdul Salam struggling, Sivaraman rushed to the spot and caught hold of him with a view to rescue him from the live link - pipe. Thereupon, both of them fell down on account of ele...
The Managing Committee of Vallapuzha Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. Vs. the ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-20-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ9
S. Siri Jagan, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition is the present managing committee of the Vallappuzha Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., a co-operative Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) represented by its President Sri. P.K. Koya. As originally constituted, the challenge in the writ petition was against Ext PI show cause notice issued under Section 32(1) of the Act, directing the committee to show cause why the committee should not be superseded under that Section for the 12 irregularities detailed therein. By interim order dated 8-5-2007, this Court directed mat the implementation of any order pursuant to Ext. P1 shall be kept in abeyance for three weeks. Subsequently, after several extensions of the said order, the same was extended until further orders on 13-1-2007. Thereafter, ExtP5 order dated 6-12-2007 was passed by the 1st respondent, superseding the Society and appointing an administrator ...
Leena Sajeevan Vs. Sub Inspector of Police and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-17-2009
Reported in: 2009(16)KLJ883
R. Basant, J.1. Is a detenu under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the 'KAAPA') entitled as of right to appear before the Advisory Board through a legal practitioner?2. Is he entitled at least to make a representation for permission to appear through a legal practitioner?3. Is he entitled to insist that such request must be considered and a decision taken by the Advisory Board before it proceeds to hear him?4. Does the non-consideration of the said request justify invalidation of his detention?These are the questions that arise for consideration in this writ petition.2. To the crucial and vital facts first. The petitioner's husband was involved in as many as ten cases. Three cases had ended in acquittal, in two cases he was convicted and five cases are pending against him. A report (Ext.P2) was made initially by the first respondent a subordinate police officer to the Superintendent of Police (R2). On the basis of that, the second res...
Kerala State Warehousing Corporation Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-17-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ305
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. An extent of 0,2820 Hectares (around 70 cents) of land in Cherthala North Village in Cherthala Taluk of Alappuzha District was declared by the Board of Revenue as needed for a public purpose, to wit, the construction of a go-down for the writ petitioner, the Kerala State Warehousing Corporation, The notification under Section 3(1) of the Kerala Land Acquisition Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the 'Kerala Act', was published on 12,6,1982 as evidenced by ExtP1 award dated 27.5.1985, passed under Section 11 of the Kerala Act. On reference, the Court passed Ext.P4 award on LAR No, 10/8 7 on 20,1,1992 on the question of apportionment and on the claim for enhancement of compensation. On appeal by the claimants, this Court further enhanced the compensation as per Ext,P5 decree dated 16,12,2002, of which, Ext,R16 (a) is the judgment The proceedings for execution commenced in 2005.2. This writ petition is filed on 18.6.2008 on the ground that on 27,5.2008...
State of Kerala and anr. Vs. Saji T.M. and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-16-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)KLJ893
Balakrishnan Nair, J.W.A. Nos. 2065/08:1. The respondents 1 and 2 in the writ petition are the appellants. The first respondent herein was the writ petitioner The point that arises for decision in this appeal is, whether the directions issued by the learned Single Judge to sanction the post of Librarian Gr.III in the second respondents school, so as to approve the appointment of the first respondent in that post, is justified or not.2. The brief facts of the case are the following: Higher Secondary course was sanctioned in the second respondent's school during the academic year 2000-01, The first respondent/petitioner pointed out that the Higher Secondary Course was sanctioned as provided in Ext. P1 Government Order dated 1.10,1991, Ext.P2 Circular issued by the Director of Higher Secondary Education dated 2.2.1999 would reveal that it is mandatory to have infrastructural facilities like laboratories, libraries etc, for sanctioning Higher Secondary course. The second respondent appoint...
Suresh. C. Vs. the State of Kerala,
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-15-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)KLJ876
Kurian Joseph, J.1. The validity of recently introduced Rule 35(22) of the Kerala Manufacture and Sale of Stamp Rules, 1960 is under challenge in these cases. The said Rule reads as follows:35 (22) In the event of the death of a licensed stamp vendor, the District Treasury Officer shall take immediate steps for filling up the vacancy: Provided that, if the death occurs before attaining the age of 65 years, a legal heir duly authorized by the other legal heirs, if any, may be appointed as the licensed vendor in the vacancy if he is otherwise qualified to be appointed and makes out an application before the District Treasury Officer within three months from the date of death. 2. Appellant is the writ petitioner. The writ petition was filed mainly with the following prayer:Declare that the Sub-rule 22 of Rule 35 of the Kerala Manufacture and Sale of Stamp (Amendment) Rules, 2007 will work out prospectively in so far as it is applicable only to those vendors who will attain 65 years of age...
Dr. Satheesh N.V. and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-15-2009
Reported in: 2009(16)KLJ831
ORDERM. Sasidharan Nambiar, J.1. Petitioners in Crl. M.C, 1468/2009 are the accused in C.C. 494/2007 on the file of Additional Chief judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram. Third respondent is the de facto complainant there in, She is the petitioner in Crl. R.P. 2068/2009. respondents therein are the petitioners in Crl. M.C. 1468/2009. Crl. M.C. 1468/2009 is filed to quash Annexure D First Information Report No. 55/2006 of Medical College Police Station, registered on receipt of Annexure C complaint filed by the third respondent before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate and forwarded for investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure by the Magistrate. After investigation Annexure E final report was filed alleging that petitioners in Crl. M.C. 1468/2009 committed the offence under Section 498A read with Section 34 of India Penal Code. It is the admitted case that first petitioner married third respondent on 18.1.2004 at Thiruvananthapuram. It is the case of the rev...
Regional Director, Esi Corporation Vs. G. Sivaprasad, Proprietor, M.S. ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-15-2009
Reported in: (2010)ILLJ279Ker
V. Ramkumar, J.1. In this appeal filed under Section 82(2) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short), the Regional Director, E.S.I. Corporation, Thrissur, challenges the order dated October 28, 2004 passed by the Employees' State Insurance Court, Kollam (hereinafter referred to as the E.I. Court), holding that the establishment by name : M.S. Bricks at Nedumpana, Kollam belonging to the respondent herein is not covered under the provisions of the Act. The impugned order was passed by the E.I. Court on an application filed as I.C. 10/2000 by the respondent/employer under Sections 75 to 77 of the Act.The Background Facts2. The facts leading to the impugned order can be summarised as follows:(A) The respondent herein namely G. Sivaprasad is the Proprietor of M.S. Bricks, Chalakkara, Pallimon, Nedumpana, Kollam. The said proprietary concern is engaged in the manufacture of bricks. Electric power is used for the manufacturing process by ins...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »