Kerala Court July 2009 Judgments

Commissioner, Central Excise Vs. CochIn International Airport Ltd.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2010)27VST355(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The connected appeals are filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise against the orders of the Tribunal holding that the respondent is not liable to pay service tax on 'user's fee' collected at the rate of Rs. 500 from every outgoing international passenger. When the appeals were taken up, counsel for the respondent submitted that the appeals are delayed and contended that by virtue of the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise v. Hongo India (P) Ltd. reported in [2009] 24 VST 298 : [2009] 5 SCC 791, the High Court has no power to condone delay in the appeal filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act. However, standing counsel, Sri John Varghese appearing for the appellants contended that the judgment of the Supreme Court is got over through the amendment now proposed with retrospective effect granting authority to the High Court to condone delay in filing appeal, if the High Court is of the view that there is reas...

A. Abubacker Vs. M/S. Prince Petroleums and Others

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellant is the complainant in CC.177/07 in the file of CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram.. The complaint stands dismissed for default. 2. The matter related to the complaint filed by the complainant seeking a sum of Rs.100,000/- is as the engine of his Maruti Swift car got damaged as the petrol filled in at the 1st opposite partys petrol bunk contained water. 3. It is submitted that he was held up in traffic and that he residing at Nagercoil, and hence could not attend the Forum on the posting date. Opposite party appeared and opposed request for getting the matter remitted. 4. Considering the fact that the matter stands disposed of by an order which is not a considered one we find that it would be only just to provide an opportunity to the complainant to substantiate his case. In the circumstances the order of the Forum is set aside on condition that the complainant pay a sum of Rs.3000/- to the respondent/opposite party towards cost within two w...

Kumaradasan Nair J. and anr. Vs. Iric Sohan and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(2)KLJ707

ORDERS.S. Satheesachandran, J.1. The revision is directed against the order passed by the Execution Court entertaining an application moved by the decree holder treating that petition as a continuation of a previous E.P., which was earlier dismissed, and ordering delivery of the decree schedule property.2. The basic facts involved are not in dispute. The 1st respondent obtained a decree in O.S. No. 150/65 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram for a declaration of title and possession over 8 cents of property in Survey No. 365 of Chenganacherry village, Thiruvananthapuram with direction to the defendant to remove at his expense a wooden shed in that property, failing which the decree holder was allowed to get the shed removed through court and obtain delivery of the property. The decree also provided mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 50A from the date of suit till delivery of possession to the decree holder. The decree was put in execution by the 1' respondent/decree holde...

K. Pramod Vs. Kerala Cricket Association and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(2)KLJ816

S.S. Satheesachandran, J.1. The writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the issue of directions/orders to the subordinate court below to hear and dispose two petitions (Exts.P2 and P3) moved by the petitioner, in a proceeding under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, expeditiously.2. The short facts involved can be summed up thus: Petitioner is the Secretary of Thrissur District Cricket Association. An arbitral proceeding as contemplated by the bye-laws of the first respondent, Kerala State Cricket Association, is now going on with respect to a dispute relating to the election to the Managing Committee of the District Association. Arbitral reference of that dispute commenced pursuant to proceedings initiated by one of the affiliated clubs of the association before the District Court, Thrissur.. seeking some interim reliefs under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. The ap...

Regional Director, Esi Corporation and anr. Vs. B. Mohanachandran Nair

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2010)ILLJ195Ker

V. Ramkumar, J.Whether the transferee including lessee of a factory is liable for the arrears of contribution due on the date of transfer from the transferor and if so whether such liability should subsist even on the date when steps for recovery are taken?1. This is the question coming up for judicial resolution. In this appeal filed under Section 82(2) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act' for short), the appellants namely Regional Director, E.S.I. Corporation, Thrissur and its recovery officer challenge the order dated May 30, 2007 passed by the Employees' Insurance Court, Kollam (hereinafter referred to as 'the E.I. Court' for short). As per the impugned order the E..I. Court allowed the application (I.C. No. 23/2003) filed by the respondent herein namely B. Mohanachandran Nair, Proprietor of Prasanthi Cashew Company, Kollam seeking a declaration that Exhibit P8 garnishee order dated May 28, 2003 issued by the E.S.I. Corporation for the r...

Unni Madhavan Nair Vs. Sreenarayana Investment

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(2)KLJ891

S.S. Satheesachandran, J.1. The writ petition is filed by the judgment debtor in E.P. No. 188/2008 in O.S. No. 240/1985 on the file of the Sub Court, Palakkad. The order passed by the execution court for settling the proclamation of sale is impeached in the petition contending that it has not been done in accordance with the mandate covered by Order XXI Rule 66 of CPC.2. Notice being given, the respondent/decree holder has entered appearance. A report from the court below was also called for as to the proceedings taken in the execution leading to the proclamation for sale.3. Heard the counsel on both sides. After notice was given to the judgment debtor under Order XXI Rule 66 of CPC, to which he appeared and sought time to file counter on subsequent posting dates, he prayed for time to make payment. As no payment was made by order dated 27.9.2008, the court passed the impugned order, which reads thus: 'No payment. Upset price fixed Rs. 7 lakhs. Proclaim and sell on 10.11.2008' and that...

Ramlath Vs. Nasar and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2010CriLJ80; 2009(3)KLJ214

ORDERThomas P. Joseph, J.1. The order passed by learned Sessions judge impleading petitioner who is a prosecution witness as additional accused is under challenge in this revision.2. Short facts of the case necessary for a decision of this revision are: The Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBCTD (CFS) Unit, Ernakulam charge sheeted two accused for offences punishable under Sections 498B and 498C read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC'). According to the prosecution, petitioner (cited by prosecution as charge witness No. 4 and examined in the court of learned Sessions Judge as P.W. 3) took a few of the counterfeit currency notes involved in the case to a Co-operative Bank on 1.2.2002 for repayment of a loan she had availed and gave those currency notes to the Bank authorities, P.W.I, Cashier of that Bank felt suspicious about the genuineness of the currency notes and informed the matter to his superior officer (accused No. 2). Accused No. 2 is said to have en...

Sherly Mammon and Others Vs. the Secretary, the Aided School Teachers, ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR, MEMBER By the order dated 4.5.05 in OP.20/05 the CDRF. Idukki has dismissed the complaint with cost of Rs.2000/- to be paid by the complainant to the opposite party. It is aggrieved by the said directions of the Forum below that the present appeal is filed by the complainant calling for the interference of this Commission as to the sustainability of the order passed by the Forum. 2. The complainants had approached the Forum with the grievances that they were subscribers to a deposit scheme propounded by the opposite party and that though they were liable to remit the instalments regularly, they were also allowed to remit the defaulted payments with payment of interest. However, certain instalments were defaulted and when they tried to pay the amounts the opposite party refused to accept the arrears on the contention that as per a decision of the committee on 1/8/03 the defaulters were not permitted to continue in the scheme. Hence, alleging deficiency in serv...

Mercy George Vs. the Kerala State Election Gommission and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(16)KLJ844

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Elected to the Akalakunnam Grama Panchayat to be its member from Ward No, 5, the petitioner became the convener of the Grama Sabha of that constituency in terms of Section 3(4) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act 1994, for short, the 'Act'. The first meeting of that Grama Sabha was held on 28.1.2006. The second meeting scheduled to be held on 20.8.2006 was adjourned for want of quorum and was held on 27.8.2006.2. The 2nd respondent filed a petition before the Kerala State Election Commission alleging that though the Panchayat was constituted on 2.10.2005, the first and second meetings of the Grama Sabha for Ward No. 5 were convened by the petitioner only on 28.1.2006 and 2 8.7.2 006 respectively and hence, having foiled, twice consecutively, to convene meetings of the Grama Sabha.. due once in three months., she has incurred the disqualification in terms of Section 35(p) of the Act.3. The writ petitioner denied the allegations against her and contended tha...

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Abdul Salim

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009ACJ395

C.T. Ravikumar, J.1. Whether the felonious or flagitious act of foes leading to disablement of a workman can be construed as an 'accident' justiciable for the purpose of compensation under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 and to hold the insurance company liable are the moot questions to be considered in this appeal.2. Appellant was the opposite party No. 2 and the respondent herein were respectively the applicant and the opposite party No. 1 in W.C.C. No. 117 of 2003 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Labour Commissioner), Thrissur. It was filed under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for compensation for the personal injuries sustained by the applicant allegedly during the course of his employment under the opposite party No. 1-respondent No. 2. The Commissioner, holding that accident fells within the purview of the Act, directed the appellant herein to deposit an amount of Rs. 1...