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.
K.K.Krishnan Namboodiri Vs. Shahul Hameed
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-2010
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.CRL.M.C.No. 4532 OF 2010Dated this the 15th day of November,2010ORDER1. Petitioners were accused 1 and 3 in C.C.1807/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Thrissur. Second accused died. Petitioner and fourth accused were absconding. Case as against them was split up and refiled as C.C.605/2010. Case as against the fifth accused was compounded by Annexure 2 judgment dated 29.4.2010. Subsequently the case as against fourth accused was also compounded after refiling the case against the petitioners as C.C.1155/2010. Petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case against the petitioners contending that ingredients of an offence is not attracted and in view of the settlement of case against co-accused, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. The case against accused 3, 4 and 5 was settled by the c...
Rajan @ Raj Mohan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-2010
V.RAMKUMAR, J.Bail Application No.7265 of 2010Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010ORDER 1. In this Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. the petitioners who are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.1373 of 2010 of Thiruvalla Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 55(a) &(i) of the Kerala Abkari Act for having been found in possession of 15 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor, seek their enlargement on bail. The petitioners were arrested on 17/10/2010. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. 3. Having regard to the nature of the offence, the duration of judicial custody undergone by the petitioners and the other circumstances of the case etc., I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail with effect from 29/11/2010 on each of them executing a bond for `35,000/- (Rupees thirty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the sati...
Manoj P.John Vs. the Joint Regional Transport Officer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-2010
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JW.P(C) No.34247 of 2010-EDated this the 15th day of November, 2010.J U D G M E N T1. The petitioner had purchased vehicle bearing No.KL- 2/K 2876 from a financier, who had repossessed the vehicle from its original owner. According to the petitioner, motor vehicles tax with respect to the period from 1.4.2010 to 31.12.2010 is in arrears and the petitioner is not in a financial position to pay the entire amount in a lump sum. Hence the limited prayer is only for permitting payment of the tax arrears within a short period, in instalments. 2. Having considered the facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that some indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to pay off the entire arrears along with additional tax if any due, in instalments within a reasonable period. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to receive motor vehicles tax due with respect to vehicle bearing No.KL-2/K 2876 along with additional tax if any due, on ...
Sunil Kumar Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-2010
V. RAMKUMAR, J.Bail Application No.7130 of 2010DATE: 15.11.2010O R D E R1. In this Petition filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C., the petitioner, who is accused No.2 in Crime No.15/2010 of Anchalumoodu Police Station for offences punishable under Secs.143,147,148,294(b),452,324,427,307 and 149 I.P.C. read with Section 27 of the Arms Act, seeks his enlargement on bail. The petitioner was arrested on 13.10.2010. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.3. Having regard to the nature of the offences, the duration of judicial custody undergone by the petitioner, the present stage of investigation of the case and the other circumstances of the case etc., I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail w.e.f. 22.11.2010 on his executing a bond for `15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned and subject...
Saly, S/O.A.M.Muhammed Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-2010
V.RAMKUMAR, J.Bail Application No.6926 of 2010Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010 ORDER1. The petitioner, who is accused No.1 in Crime No.815 of 2009 of Kasaragod Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326 & 153-A read with Section 149 I.P.C., seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application.3. Anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this nature. But at the same time, I am inclined to permit the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to have his application for bail considered by the Magistrate having jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer on 26/11/2010 or on 27/11/2010 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. The petitioner shall thereafter be produced before the Magistrate who on being satisfied that the petitioner has been interrogated by the poli...
Ajay Jose K.i. Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-2010
V. RAMKUMAR, J.Bail Application No.7480 of 2010DATED: 15.11.2010O R D E R1. Petitioner, who is the accused in C.C. No.43 of 2010 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Tadpatri, Anantapur District, Andra Pradesh, for an offence punishable under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 involving a sum of above `1,00,000/-, seeks anticipatory bail.2. Eventhough with regard to a case pending before a court located beyond the territorial limits of State of Kerala, this Court has no jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail unless the petitioner is sought to be arrested within the limits of State of Kerala, in view of the decision Madhusoodan v. Superintendent of Police. (1992(2) KLT 83). The petitioner is accordingly directed to surrender before the S.H.O., Thoppumpady Police Station and execute a bond for `15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Officer concerned in the event of his arre...
T.P.Balachandran Vs. Mohammed Parasseri, S/O.Alavi
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-2010
THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.O.P(C).No.705 of 2010Dated this 15th day of November, 20101. Defendant in O.S.No.168 of 2006 of the court of learned Sub Judge, Manjeri is the petitioner before me. An ex parte decree was passed on 12-02-2009 for payment of money to the respondent. On 15-02-2009 petitioner filed application to set aside the ex parte decree. That application was put in the defect list and returned to cure defect but, not noticed by petitioner or counsel who belonged to Calicut. Thereafter petitioner filed applications to set aside the ex parte decree and to condone the delay of 450 days. Application to condone the delay was allowed. Application to set aside ex parte decree was allowed on condition that petitioner deposits Rs.One Lakh as security. Petitioner filed Ext.P8, application offering landed property as security. Grievance of petitioner is that the said application has not been considered. Petitioner, as per the impugned order is called upon to deposit Rs.One Lakh on or before ...
Reema Abdul Majeed K. Vs. University of Calicut
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-2010
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.W.P.(C) No. 34352 of 2010 TDated this the 15th day of November, 2010J U D G M E N T1. Petitioner submits that she appeared for B.Tech examination and failed in the paper 'Basic Electrical Engineering'. She submitted Ext.P1 application for revaluation and filed this writ petition seeking expeditious revaluation and declaration of results.2. I heard Standing Counsel appearing for the University also. 3. Having regard to the facts pointed out, it is directed that the University shall complete the revaluation sought for and declare the result of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment, provided the application has been received and is otherwise in order.4. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with the writ petition before the University for compliance. 5. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ...
Cyriac Vs. Joseph Thomas
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-2010
K.M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.W.P.(C).No. 34282 of 2010 IDated this the 15th day of November, 20101. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: "i) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents 4 to 6 to provide adequate and sufficient police protection for the person and property of the petitioner from the ilelgal threats of respondents 1 to 3 and their henchmen. ii) to issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents 4 to 6 to provide adequate and sufficient police protection to the petitioner for carrying out the construction of compound wall in his property from the illegal threats of respondents 1 to 3."2. Briefly the case of the petitioner is as follows. Petitioner is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of a property having an extent of 56 cents in Re-survey No.419/3-1 in Thrikkodithanam Village, Changanacherry Taluk. Respondents 1 to 3, who are residing on the eastern side of the petitio...
P.Yoosef, S/O.Late Avarankutty Haji Vs. the Ramanattukara Grama Pancha ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Nov-15-2010
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.W.P(C).No.4931 of 2010Dated this the 15th day of November, 20101. The petitioner is the owner of a two storeyed building situated in Re.Sy.No.442/9A of Ramanattukara Village in Kozhikode district, which is a portion of a larger building consisting of three floors, which was in existence in the property. Though the remaining portions of the building consist of the ground floor, the first floor and the second floor, the building in the land allotted to the petitioner's share consists only of the ground floor. Though Exts.P5 and P6 series of photographs would show that the first floor has been partly built, it is submitted that the ground floor of the building alone has been numbered. With a view to put up the first floor and second floor of the building, the petitioner submitted Ext.P7 application for building permit. That application was rejected by Ext.P10 order on the ground that the building does not have sufficient set back and open space in terms of the Kerala Muni...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »