Kerala Court November 2010 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.
The Senior Superintendent of Post Office Vs. K.K.Abraham, Kaithakuzhiy ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2010
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.W.P (C) No.34334 of 2010Dated this the 19th November, 2010J U D G M E N T1. The first respondent had joined the monthly income scheme account of the petitioner and deposited an amount of Rs.1,98,000/-. On the ground that the deposit was made by an institution which was ineligible to make such deposit in terms of the rules of the Scheme, after deducting the amounts already paid towards the interest, the balance was paid to the 1st respondent. Against this action of the petitioner, respondents 1 and 2 filed O.P. No.383/2003 on the file of the C.D.R.F, Kottayam. 2. Although initially the complaint was dismissed, in the appeal the matter was remanded. On reconsideration, the C.D.R.F allowed the complaint and directed payment of the amounts to the depositors in terms of the rules of the scheme. Against that order of the C.D.R.F, petitioner filed Appeal No.608/2005 before the State Commission. By Ext.P1 order rendered on 7.1.2010, the appeal was dismissed. 3. Although the C...
Government Electrical Contractors Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2010
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.W.P.(C) Nos.28113/2009-H & 30556/2009-LDated this the 19th day of November, 2010.1. These writ petitions are filed by the respective Associations of Government Electrical Contractors, aggrieved by the circulars issued by the Government changing the procedure for tender of civil and electrical works under the Government, which according to them, is in violation of the provisions of P.W.D. Manual as well as Article 14 of the Constitution. W.P.(C) No.30556/2009 is treated as the leading case and the exhibits are referred to as marked therein. 2. The grievance raised by the petitioners in a nutshell are the following: The members of the Associations are electrical contractors. As per the procedure prescribed under the P.W.D. Manual and Code and the practice which was being followed throughout, electrical and civil contracts would be tendered separately. Assessment of the requirements of electrical works can only be determined on completion of the structure of the ...
Mr.Sajimon.E.J. Vs. the District Educational Officer and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2010
K.T.SANKARAN, J.W.P.(C).No.34043 OF 2010Dated this the 19th day of November, 20101. As per Ext.P1 appointment order dated 1.6.2009, the petitioner was appointed as HSA(English) in Sacred Heart Higher Secondary School, Dwaraka, Mananthavady. The proposal for approval was forwarded by the Manager to the District Educational Officer. The Manager also sent Ext.P3 reminder to the District Educational Officer. It is submitted that the petitioner had submitted a representation before the District Educational Officer. The petitioner filed WP(C) No.10873 of 2010, which was disposed of as per Ext.P4 judgment dated 30th March, 2010, the operative portion of which reads as follows: "In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this Writ Petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being h...
Pushpajan, Full Time Menial Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2010
K.T.SANKARAN, J.W.P.(C).No.33674 OF 2010Dated this the 19th day of November, 2010 1. The petitioner is working as Full Time Menial in A.K.S.G.H.S. Malappattam in Kannur District. His grievance is that he is denied the benefit of by transfer appointment as Laboratory Assistant in Government Higher Secondary School. 2. It is stated that as per the Special Rules, the method of appointment to the post of Laboratory Assistant in Government Higher Secondary Schools is prescribed. According to the Special Rules, the post of Lab Assistant comes under category No.4 of Rule 3. Rule 3 provides the method of appointment (1) by direct recruitment and (2) by transfer from among qualified last grade employees in the schools, at the ratio 75:25. According to the petitioner, Full Time Menial is a last grade employee and accordingly, the 25% quota reserved for by transfer appointment as Laboratory Assistant should be available to Full Time Menial as well. It is pointed out by the petitioner that on earl...
M/S.Afcons Infrastructure Limited Vs. the Chairman
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2010
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.W.P.(C). No.24325/2009-IDated this the 19th day of November, 2010J U D G M E N T1. The petitioner who is a Civil Construction Company is seeking for a direction to the first respondent-Chairman, Cochin Port Trust to obtain a report regarding the recommendation of the Expert Committee constituted by him as per Ext.P4, as expeditiously as possible, and dispose of the appeal Ext.P1 without delay and to pass consequential orders directing payment of amounts due to the petitioner. The second prayer is to direct the first respondent to pay the amount due to the petitioner as claimed, on the plea that the petitioner has fulfilled the terms of the contract after successfully completing the whole of the works and handing over the project to the first and second respondents making it fully operational for public use on 15/03/2004. The dispute herein is in a narrow compass. The essential facts necessary for the disposal of the case are the following: 2. The petitioner co...
Joseph Nadar Thapsai Vs. Ariyamcode Panchayat
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2010
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.A.S. NO. 657 OF 1998Dated this the 19th day of November , 2010.J U D G M E N T1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree passed by the Subordinate Judge, Neyyattinkara in O.S.33/96. The suit is one for declaration and damages. The declaratory relief is to the effect that the right of the plaintiff over the property is to be declared and the defendants are to be restrained by a permanent injunction from making a way or destroying the boundaries of the property and also for damages of Rs.55,000/- caused on account of the high handed action of the defendants. The trial court on appreciation of the materials dismissed the suit. It is against that decision the plaintiff has come up in appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for all the sides. There are two prayers which really require consideration in the whole matter. One is with respect to the declaratory relief and the second is with respect to the damages. So far as damages are concerned the trial court ha...
ikkirimath Vs. Hyrunnissa
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2010
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.O.P.(FC).No. 784 OF 2010Dated this the 19h day of November, 20101. The petitioner/husband, against whom a decree has been passed by the Family Court, Kozhikode in favour of the respondent wife for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,0,7000/- and is presently facing execution proceedings by arrest and detention, has filed this original petition seeking a direction to the Family Court to consider Ext.P2 application seeking time to pay the balance amount and to keep in abeyance operation of the arrest warrant which is already issued against him. 2. Sr.P.Sreekumar learned counsel for the petitioner submits, on the basis of Ext.P1 receipt, that out of the total amount of Rs.1,07,000/- the petitioner has already paid Rs.80,000/- and the balance is only Rs.27,000/-. The learned counsel submits further that the petitioner is prepared to liquidate the entire decree debt , but wants only some time. 3. Having considered the submissions of Mr.Sreekumar, we feel that i...
M/S.Nainas Garmets and Handlooms and anr. Vs. Employees State Insuranc ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2010
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.Ins.A.NO.8 OF 2010Dated this the 19th day of November, 2010.J U D G M E N T1. This is an appeal preferred against the judgment of the Employees' Insurance Court, Alappuzha in I.C.No.14/2005. Applicant before the court is an establishment by name M/s. Nainans Garments & Handlooms which is a proprietary concern. 2. It is the contention of the establishment that it has never employed more than 16 persons and therefore it is not liable to be covered under the Employees' State Insurance Act. On the contra, the Employees' State Insurance Corporation's definite stand is that there are 20 employees and therefore they are liable to be covered under the Act. 3. When the trial court wrote the order, it made a further observation by stating that the establishment had employed at least two more headload workers making the total number of employees as 22. Such a case was not pleaded by any of the parties at the time of contesting the case. To make it short, the dispute is with respe...
Rajan Kunjilath, Cheruvathur House Vs. V.K.Purushothaman, S/O.Valayil ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2010
M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, J.Crl.R.P. No:550 of 2003Dated this the 22nd day of November 2010O R D E R1. This Revision petition is filed by the accused in S.T. No.2739 of 1998 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thrissur challenging the conviction and sentence passed against him for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act. The cheque amount was Rs.16,608/-. In the Trial Court, the accused was sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay a compensation of Rs.20,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The appeal against that conviction and sentence was dismissed. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, learned counsel for the complainant and the public prosecutor.3. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner reiterated the same contention raised before the Trial Court and the appellate court. Learned counsel for the complainant supported the judgment of the court below. 4. ...
Bharathi, W/O. Sekharan Vs. the Union of India and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-19-2010
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J.W.P.(C)No.33108 Of 2009DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2010J U D G M E N T1. The petitioner challenges Exhibit P7 order passed by the Government of India rejecting the application for sanction of Swantrata Sainik Samman(SSS)Pension. 2. The petitioner's case is that her late husband Shri Sekharan was an active participant in the Punnapra-Vayalar Struggle. Police arrayed him as an accused in Case No.P.E.7/1122ME before the Special Magistrate, Alappuzha and accordingly, he was arrested and lodged in the Sub Jail, Alappuzha from 30.3.1947 to 20.10.1947. The State Government has already granted pension to the petitioner's late husband under the Freedom Fighter's Pension Scheme as evidenced by Exhibit P1. 3. The petitioner relies upon Exhibit P2, the Co-prisoners Certificate issued by Shri P.A.Solomon, Ex-M.P. In Exhibit P2 what is stated is that late Shri Sekharan was lodged in the same jail along with him during the period from 30.3.1947 to 20.10.1947. Other do...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »