Kerala Court August 2009 Judgments

Bhuvanendran T. Vs. Lic Housing Finance Ltd. and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ349

P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.1. The petitioner has approached this Court Challenging Exts. P2 and P5 notices issued by the Secured Creditor invoking the relevant provisions under the SARFAESI Act. The case of the petitioner is that, he has already approached the Civil Court by filing O.S. 219 of 2005, for settlement of accounts and unless and until the same is finalized, no proceedings under the SARFAESI Act will He.2. Yet another contention raised by the petitioner is that in response to the averments in the plaint filed before the Civil Court, the Secured Creditor has filed Ext.P1 written statement, wherein the question of maintainability of the suit is also raised stating that, the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act had been taken much prior to the institution of the suit by issuing notice under Section 13(2) on 18.12.2004 and hence that the secured Creditor is very touch entitled to proceed with such steps under the Act. During the course of the proceedings before the Civil Court, the...

P.A. Shahabudeen Vs. District Collector and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2010)28VST91(Ker)

S.S. Satheesachandran, J.1. These two writ petitions are filed by two brothers separately, who were erstwhile partners of a firm by name 'Shabago Marketing', impeaching the correctness, propriety and legality of the judgments passed by the VI Additional District Judge, Ernakulam in the respective civil miscellaneous appeals preferred by them against the orders passed by the insolvency court in their respective applications declining protection order against proceeding for realisation of sales tax arrears due from them in respect of their business concern.2. Initially both the petitioners together had filed a petition as I. P. No. 1 of 2003 for declaring them as insolvents. But, later realising that a joint petition by them for the relief claimed is not entertainable, that petition was withdrawn with liberty to file fresh application. The petitioner in W. P. (C.) No. 6701 of 2008, thereafter, filed I. P. No. 1 of 2005 and the petitioner in W. P. (C.) No. 19710 of 2008 filed I. P. No. 2 ...

The Sahrdaya College of Engineering and Technology Vs. the University ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ185

V. Giri, J.1. A decision taken by the Calicut University declining to extend the provisional affiliation of the petitioners herein have been challenged in these writ petitions. All the petitioners are Private Self Financing Colleges. Petitioners in W.P. (C). 19599/2009 & 19600/2009 are the Managers of Self Financing Engineering Colleges and the petitioners in W.P. (C). 19591/2009 & 19604/2009 are Medical institutions. All the institutions were granted provisional affiliation by the University of Calicut earlier and such affiliation was extended thereafter, from year to year. A dispute arose regarding extension of the provisional affiliation of these institutions for the year 2007-08 and 2008-09. This Court had in the case of Medical Institutions, vide decision in Jubilee Mission Medical College and Research Institute v. University of Calicut 2008 (4) KLT 966 held that the University was bound to take a decision regarding extension of the provisional affiliation of those institutions be...

L.i.C. of India Vs. Dr. Chandy Joseph

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ165

V. Ram Kumar, J.1. The defendant in O.S. No. 181 of 1995 on the file of the Sub court, Alappuzha is the appellant in this appeal. The appellant is the Alappuzha Branch of the Life Insurance Corporation of India falling under its Kottayam division.2. The aforesaid suit, instituted by the respondent herein was one for immediate realisation of a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (50% of the amount assured) together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 9.12.1994 and also for a mandatory injunction directing the defendant to comply with the provisions of Ext.A1 Policy of Insurance and to pay 10% of the sum assured every year commencing from the Policy anniversary.3. The facts leading to the present litigation can be summarised as follows:The respondent/plaintiff is a Dental Surgeon practicing at Alappuzha. He obtained Ext.Al Policy of Insurance dated 8.2.1994 under a Scheme called 'Asha Deep Policy'. The proposal for the Policy of Insurance, was submitted on 21.11.1993. The Policy was for a su...

Thoombath Haris and ors. Vs. Khadeeja Sherbin

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ172

R. Basant, J.1. Does the expression 'maintenance to be made and paid to the wife within the iddat period by her former husband' appearing in Section 3(1)(a) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' include past maintenance payable to her prior to her divorce? This is the crucial question arising for consideration in this appeal.2. Fundamental facts are not in dispute. The marriage between the spouses took place on 7-1 -2007. There was instant acrimony in the marriage and talak was pronounced on 17-2-2008 by the husband unilaterally- The wife claimed maintenance for the period from 7-1 -2007 to 17-2-2008, Sheclaimed such past maintenance at the rate of Rs.9,000/ - per mensem. The petition was filed after the divorce on 28-2-2008.3. The husband is highly qualified. He works as a petroleum Engineer in Nigeria. The wife asserted that the monthly income of the husband at the time of marriage was above Rupees one lakh. At the time w...

Assistant Executive Engineer, P.H. Sub Division, Kerala Water Authorit ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party/Water Authority in OP 21/04 in the file of CDRF, Kannur. The bill issued by the appellants stands cancelled. The appellant is also ordered to pay a compensation of Rs.5000/- and cost of Rs.1000/- 2. There was no representation for the respondent/complainant. 3. It is the case of the complainant that he was making regular payments towards water charges. While so he received an additional bill for a sum of Rs.4752/- for the period from 4/02 to 9/03. According to the complainant he has not consumed that much of water. Deficiency is alleged as there was no periodical recording of meter readings. 4. The opposite party/appellant has contended that the amount mentioned in the bill is based on the actual consumption of water and hence there is no illegality. 5. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of PW1, DW1; Exts.A1 to A5 and B1 to B3. 6. The Forum has noted that there was serious deficiency on the part o...

The South Indian Workers Congress and ors. Vs. Sree Sankara University ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ415; (2010)ILLJ276Ker

K. Balakrishnan Nair, J.1. This appeal was filed against the order of the learned Single Judge in I.A. No. 1'5603/06 and connected orders in W.P.(C) No. 5532 of 2006. The brief facts of the case are the following:The above writ petition was filed by Sree Sankara University of Sanskrit, challenging Ext.P 14 award of the Industrial Tribunal, Aleppey dated 14.11.2005. As per the said award, the Tribunal declared that the termination of the workmen concerned therein was illegal, as the same was done in violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act It was further declared that, they shall be deemed to be continuing in service and are entitled to get 50% of the backwages. In the writ petition, the union and the workmen filed interlocutory applications, claiming payment of wages, as contemplated under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'I.D. Act'). The impugned orders were the orders passed in those applications. Though the applications were all...

The M/S Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Rep by Its Divisional Manager ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA: MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF. Kozhikode in the file of CC.No.203/07 dated 18th November 2008. The appellant is the opposite party. In short the complainant is a agriculturists. He had taken a livestock cattle insurance policy from the opposite party for a cow. Unfortunately the cow died on 20.4.07 and after the death of the cow, ear tag had lost. For this reason opposite party had repudiated the claim. The complainant assures that the cows tag No. is 16499 and the cow, which is reported to have been dead is the cow with the tag No.16499. The veterinary doctor has given death certificate to the effect that cow which was died was the same with the tag No.16499 as the same doctor had come to check up the cow on several times. Panchayat President, Ward member and other neighbours have certified that died cow is one and same as the cow with tag No. 16499. But the opposite party had repudiated the claim. Hence this complaint. The oppos...

Dasappan Vs. the Secretary to Govt. Taxes Department and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ161

Tottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner, a toddy shop licencee; not obliged by Rule 28A of the Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953 in short, the 'FL Rules', to observe dry day in terms of that Rule; challenges in anticipation, a proposal which he says the government has, to keep the Foreign Liquor shops open on all or some among the days enumerated in the aforesaid Rule, 'Onnaam Onam' this year falls on the first of September, 2009, on which the Foreign Liquor shops should remain closed in terms of Rule 28A of the FL Rules. The petitioner says that there is a proposal to keep the Foreign Liquor Shop open on that day, on the premise that Onam cannot be well enjoyed without adequate supply of liquor. Without much search, it can be well assured that what the petitioner ultimately projects is his private commercial interest, since the contentionis that the rights and liabilities of parties are determined and finalised when notification is issued as a predator the sale of shops, before licen...

M.R. Reghuchandrabal Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ131

M. Sashidharan Nambiar, J.1. Whether State Government has power of superintendence over a case being investigated by Vigilance and Anti-corruption Bureau? Whether the Government is competent to order further investigation ends? These are the important questions to be settled in this writ Petition.2. Case of petitioner in brief is as follows: Based on an inquiry conducted by the vigilance and Anti-corruption Bureau (in short VACB) on the allegation that as Minister of Excise and as a member of the Legislative Assembly during the period 1991 to 1996, petitioner amassed wealth disproportionate to his known source of income to the rune of Rs. 6 lakhs, after getting authorization from Director of Vigilance and Anti-corruption Bureau, Crime VC4/2001 of Special Cell, Thiruvananthapuram under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, under Ext. P2 F.I.R, was registered. The allegation against the petitioner is that he constructed a palatial house, T.C.5/22...