Kerala Court December 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.
Prasad.T. Vs. State of Kerala, and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-2010
1. The petitioner was an applicant to the post of Vocational Teacher in Medical Laboratory Technology. She was having the qualification Bsc. MLT in Medical Laboratory Technology with 59.6% marks which is clear from Ext.P1 copy of the mark list. 2. The notification is dated 5.10.2004 issued by the second respondent. The method of recruitment is by transfer or direct recruitment. The qualification prescribed is Degree in Medical Laboratory Technology with not less than 60% marks from any of the Universities in Kerala which is clear from Ext.P3 copy of the Gazette notification. The petitioner submitted an application and actually he had participated in the written examination and passed the same and finally he was included in the rank list. At the time of verification of the documents he was informed that the application is rejected for want of sufficient marks, viz. 60%. This is under challenge in this writ petition. 3. Ext.P5 is the copy of the Government Order by which an amendment was...
Thajudeen T.J. Vs. Muhammed Ismail, and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-2010
1. This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha in O.P. (MV) No.596/2004. 2. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and he has been awarded a compensation of Rs.60,600/=. There was a direction to the insurance company to deposit the amount and get it recovered from the second respondent on the ground that the driver did not have the valid licence and as there is breach of the policy condition, the insurance company is entitled to be reimbursed. It is against that decision; the second respondent has come up in appeal. 3. The contention of the present appellant is that he had sold the vehicle to one Shaju Bhaskaran on 26.2.2004. Therefore it is contended that as the accident occurred on 11.3.2004, on the date of the accident the second respondent was not the owner of the vehicle and therefore he is not liable to pay the compensation. Unfortunately this contention had not been taken up before the Tribunal and so the Tribunal did not have the...
Suhra Haris Koya, and anr. Vs. State of Kerala, and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-2010
1. Prayers sought in the writ petition No.17048/2010 are to quash Ext.P5 and to direct respondents 1 to 4 not to receive tax or issue possession certificate in relation to any of the properties included in I.P.No.3/1100 (ME) pending before the Additional Sub Court, Kollam. 2. I.P.No.3/1100 (ME) was filed by one Koya Kunju who had extensive properties which were scheduled in the said proceedings. The pleadings show that the properties of the insolvent were handed over to the Official Receiver, District Court, Kollam. Subsequently, all the creditors were paid off and finally the insolvency proceedings were annulled by the court by its order dated 23.11.1960. 3. The remaining properties which were in the hands of the Receiver ought to have been returned to the legal heirs of the insolvent. It would appear that many of the legal heirs of the insolvent also got themselves impleaded in I.P.No.3/1100 (ME). According to the petitioners, while the proceedings are thus pending, they came to know...
Ammini.P.Palani. Vs. Lalikumar Mathew, and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-2010
1. In this Revision Petition filed under Section 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who was the accused in C.C. No. 588 of 2006 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chengannur challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against her for an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The cheque amount was `50,000/-. The fine/compensation ordered by the lower appellate court is `50,000/-. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the Revision Petitioner re-iterated the contentions in support of the Revision. 4. The courts below have concurrently held that the cheque in question was drawn by the petitioner in favour of the complainant, that the complainant had validly complied with clauses (a) and (b) of the proviso to Section 138 of the Act, and that the Revision Petitioner/accused failed to m...
Maheendra, and anr. Vs. State of Kerala, and anr.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-2010
1. Petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.463/2010 of Kareelakulangara Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506(1) I.P.C., seek anticipatory bail. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. 3. After evaluating the factors and parameters which are to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 122 of the verdict dated 2-12-2010 of the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others (Crl.Appeal No. 2271 of 2010), I am of the view that anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this nature, since the investigating officer has not had the advantage of interrogating the petitioners. But at the same time, I am inclined to permit the petitioners to surrender before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to have their application for bail allowed by the Magistrate having jurisdiction. 4. Accordingly, the petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer on...
Shajudeen. Vs. State of KeralA.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-2010
1. In this Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the petitioner, who is accused No.1 in Crime No.159 of 2010 of Peruvanthanam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b) & 308 read with Section 34 I.P.C., seeks his enlargement on bail. The petitioner was arrested on 22/06/2010. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application contending inter alia that the petitioner is involved in 13 crimes including a murder case and that out of those cases in two L.P cases he is being produced before court on production warrant. 3. Whatever may be the antecedents of the petitioner, the facts of the present case indicate that he had only intimidated the victim using a toy gun. He has already undergone 168 days of pre-trial incarceration. 4. 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...
Corporate Educational Agency, and anr. Vs. Mahatma Gandhi University, ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-2010
1. The first petitioner in WP(C) No.35069 of 2010 is the Corporate Educational Agency in respect of Nirmala Collge, Muvattupuha. It is stated that Nirmala College, Muvattupuha is a Christian Minority Educational Institution. The petitioner relies on Ext.P1 certificate dated 15.7.2010 issued by the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions. A vacancy of Principal arose in the college on the retirement of the Principal on 31.3.2010. The first petitioner appointed the second petitioner as Principal with effect from 1.4.2010. The second petitioner was also appointed as the Drawing & Disbursement Officer pending approval of his appointment as the Principal. The reliefs in the Writ Petition are the following: "i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the respondents 1 & 2 to approve Ext.P2 order of appointment of the 2nd petitioner as Principal, forthwith; ii) Declare that Section 59(3) of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act cannot apply to Nirmala Colle...
BabithA.M. Vs. University of Kerala, and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-2010
1. The dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent for seniority is the question to be decided herein. 2. Both of them were employed under the Kerala University and they sought inter-University transfer to the third respondent Cochin University of Science and Technology which was granted by the Kerala University on reciprocal basis. The petitioner wants to retain her seniority in the Kerala University above the fourth respondent who joined the third respondent University earlier than the petitioner, consequent to the inter- University transfer. 3. The details with regard to the petitioner and the fourth respondent are the following:- The petitioner entered the service of the Kerala University in the post of Laboratory Assistant on 31/12/2005. She was promoted to the post of Technical Assistant on 06/03/2007 and continued there in the post till she was transferred to the Kerala University Study Centre at Alappuzha. 4. The petitioner applied for an inter-University transfer ...
P.P.Muhammadali, and ors. Vs. Feroke Grama Panchayath, and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-2010
1. The first petitioner is the owner of a parcel of land approximately 10 cents in extent situated in Re-survey No.150/2B of Feroke Village, Kozhikode Taluk, Kozhikode District. The second petitioner took the said parcel of land on lease as per Ext.P1. He along with petitioners 3 to 4 and others thereafter is starting vending fish in the said property. The land where petitioners 2 to 4 are conducting fish vending is situate adjacent to the public market run by the Feroke Grama Panchayat. Petitioners 2 to 4 have admittedly not obtained the permission of the local authority before establishing a market to vend fish in the land belonging to the first petitioner. Respondents 4 and 5 thereupon filed complaints before the local authority objecting to the fish market being run by the petitioners. They thereafter filed W.P. (C) No.1749 of 2010 in this Court. By Ext.P4 judgment delivered on 19.1.2010, a learned single Judge of this Court directed the Secretary of the first respondent Panchayat ...
Mary Sam. Vs. Kozhenchery Grama Panchayat, and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-07-2010
1. The petitioner and her husband jointly own 18.87 ares of land in R.Sy.No.300/4-3 of Kozhencherry Village, Kozhencherry Taluk, Pathanamthitta District. On an application made by the petitioner, by Ext.P1 order dated 19.1.2010, the District Town Planner, Pathanamthitta granted permission to construct a building for starting a hollow brick manufacturing unit in the said parcel of land. By Ext.P2 order dated 3.3.2010, the Environmental Engineer, Kerala State Pollution Control Board, Pathanamthitta, granted consent to operate the unit to the petitioner. The Assistant Divisional Officer, Fire and Rescue Services, Kottayam, who was holding full additional charge of Assistant Divisional Officer, Pathanamthitta has issued Ext.P3 No Objection Certificate for the establishment of a hollow brick manufacturing unit in the aforesaid parcel of land. The petitioner thereafter applied to the local authority, viz., the first respondent herein for permission to establish a hollow brick manufacturing u...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »