Kerala Court July 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.
N. Anilkumar Vs. the Sub Inspector of Police and
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
K.M. Joseph 1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the first respondent to provide adequate and effective police protection to the petitioner for conducting the quarrying operations in his property with immediate effect.ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the first respondent to take immediate action on the complaints of the petitioner and to proceed against the accused in accordance with law.2. We heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the second respondent as also the learned Government Pleader.3. Learned Counsel for the second respondents submits that the second respondent has filed a Writ Petition challenging the issuance of the permit to the petitioner.4. As long as the petitioner has got permission to operate the quarry, the second respondent cannot obstruct the working of the qua...
V.M. Lakshmanan and Vs. Superintendent, Government Hospital and
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
Thomas P. Joseph, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioners in O.P. No. 128 of 1994 of the court of learned District Judge, Thalassery. As per order passed in the said proceeding petitioners were appointed as legal guardian of the minor child, A.P. Varun. While disposing of O.P. No. 128 of 1994 learned District Judge directed petitioners to deposit a sum of Rupees two lakhs but, petitioners were not able to raise that much amount and hence learned District Judge allowed petitioners to deposit Rupees one lakh in cash and furnish security for the balance amount which, I am told petitioners have complied. Later, petitioners filed I.A. No. 581 of 2007 for permission to withdraw certain amount from the interest that accrued in the fixed deposit, according to the petitioners to be used for welfare of the child. But that application was dismissed by the learned District Judge. That order is under challenge in this Writ Petition. This Court as per order dated 29.09.2009 after hearing...
Abdul Khader Vs. Sameer
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
Thomas P. Joseph, J.1. Petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P. No. 39 of 2010 in O.S. No. 280 of 2007 of the court of learned Munsiff, Mavelikkara. Respondent sought realisation of the amount due under the decree by personal execution against petitioner. Respondent proved means of petitioner. Executing court found that inspite of having means petitioner has neglected/refused to pay amount due under the decree and that was followed by an order for issue of warrant of arrest against petitioner and detention of petitioner for a period of three months. Learned counsel states that petitioner on account of financial difficulties is unable to pay the amount in lump and requests for installment facility. It is stated that though in the counter, petitioner had expressed his inability to pay the amount in lump executing court has not considered the request for payment of the amount in installments.2. Question whether petitioner can be permitted to pay the amount in installments is a matter whi...
Noorudheen Vs. the Sub Inspector of Police and
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
K.M. Joseph, J.1. The petitioner has approached this court seeking the following prayers:i) issue a writ in the form of a direction directing the 1st respondent to assist the petitioner to take the bike of the petitioner.ii) issue a writ in the form of direction directing the first respondent to take up Ext.P3 petition and consider the same as expeditiously as possible.2. Briefly the case of the petitioner is as follows. The petitioner is employed in Dubai. In the year 1998 he brought a bike from Dubai after customs clearance and registered the same in Kerala with registration No. KL8M2803. Ext.P1 is the registration certificate of the bike.3. In 1999 there was a family partition in the family of the petitioner and he has signed in the partition deed. After the partition, he went back to Dubai and while he left India the petitioner has kept his bike and house hold articles in the residential house. After partition, the said house was assigned to his brother, Salim. Later Salim demolish...
Abitha D/O. Late Vikram Sing Vs. Shanil Kumar Gopi
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
ORDERThomas P. Joseph, J.1. The wife seeks transfer of G.O.P. No. 60 of 2010 from the Family Court, Ernakulam to Family Court, Thrissur. Petitioner/wife stated that she is a resident of Nattika which according to the learned Counsel is nearer to Family Court, Thrissur than to Family Court, Ernakulam where case is now pending. It is stated that M.C. No. 93 of 2010 filed by petitioner seeking maintenance for herself and the child is pending in Family Court, Thrissur and if the cases are pending in two courts petitioner will have to attend the courts at Thrissur and Ernakulam. It is also stated that there is nobody else to look after petitioner's minor child. In the circumstances the request for transfer.2. Learned Counsel for respondent would contend that Nattika is not a far away place from Ernakulam nor is it inconvenient for petitioner to go to Ernakulam. It is also stated that respondent, to see his child has to go to Thrissur if the case is transferred to Family Court, Thrissur.3. I...
The Director, Mercy Hospital and Another Vs. Lilly Joseph
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated 24th December 2004 passed by CDRF, Kannur in OP No. 464/1999. As per the said order, the appellants/opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- as compensation with cost of Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant. Hence the present appeal by the opposite parties. 2. The case of the respondent/complainant is as follows: The complainant approached the first opposite partys hospital where she had consultation of the second opposite party Dr. Shanthi. The complainant had low backache, lower abdominal pain and white discharge from her vagina. The second opposite party doctor examined the complainant and suggested abdominal hysterectomy. The second opposite party conducted the hysterectomy operation on 07-11-1997. The opposite parties never informed the complainant about any problem or side effects in doing hysterectomy. After the hysterectomy operation there was continuous leak of blood and u...
Kochagasthy S/O. Lonappan Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-07-2010
Joseph Francis, J.1. This appeal is filed by the accused in S.C. No. 265 of 2002 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court, N. Parur. That was a case charge sheeted by the Circle Inspector of Police, Angamaly against the accused under Section 302 I.P.C.2. The prosecution case is that on 10.6.2000 around 1 p.m. the accused committed murder of one Jose, aged about 35, S/o. Thoman, Nellissery Veedu, near Veternary Hospital, Kokkunnu Kara, Mookkannur village by stabbing him on his chest with a knife, while he was at the southern side of the road situated on the northern side of the property owned by Varghese, S/o. Ouseph, Nellanattukara, Kokkunnu, Anappara Road near Vetenary Hospital, Kokkunnu kara, Mukkannur Village and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.3. PW1 - Varghese gave Ext.P1 F.I. statement before the police, on the basis of which, a case was registered as Crime No. 301 of 2000 of Angamaly Police Station and investigated. After completing the investig...
High Road Kuries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. V.G. Surendran, S/O. Velimparambil
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-07-2010
Thomas P. Joseph, J.1. This writ petition is in challenge of Exts.P10 and P11 orders passed by learned Principal Munsiff, Thrissur on I.A. Nos. 11188/2009 & 11190/2009 in O.S. No. 1471/2008. That is a suit filed by the petitioner, a Private Limited Company represented by its Chairman for recovery of money allegedly due from respondent as per Kuri transactions. Respondent/defendant No. 1 contended that he has discharged the entire liability and no further amount is due. Respondent/defendant No. 1 adduced evidence and he was examined as DW.1. He claimed that he has furnished cash security for 32 Kuries run by petitioner and which were adjusted in the liability under the Kuri in question. When he was confronted with a letter allegedly written by him, he denied the signature. Petitioner filed a list of documents to prove among other things that it had lien over 9 kuries. Then came applications from the respondent to re-open his evidence and to summon Deputy Chairman and Accountant of petit...
Priya Dinesh Vs. K.E. Rajagopalan Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-07-2010
Thomas P. Joseph, J.1. Defendant in O.S. No. 1360/2007 of the court of learned Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam, and appellant in A.S. No. 9 of 2009 of the court of learned Additional District Judge (VI), Ernakulam is the petitioner. She suffered a decree for eviction from the suit property as per Exts. P1 and P2. That decree is being put to execution in E.P. No. 105/2009. In the mean time, petitioner challenged Exts.P1 and P2 before the appellate court where she made an undertaking to vacate the suit property in May, 2010 and acting upon that undertaking, learned Additional District Judge granted time to the petitioner till May, 2010. Execution of decree was accordingly stayed till then. Petitioner however, was not able to find an alternative accommodation and hence could not stand by her commitment. Respondent-decree holder has filed E.A. No. 267/2010 for revival of proceedings and to evict petitioner without notice. Now, there is an order for delivery by 9.7.2010 with police assistance....
P. Mohammed @ Manu Vs. State Delimitation Commission,
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Jul-07-2010
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioner who is the Councillor of Ward No. 30 of the 3rd respondent Municipality has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the proceedings, Exhibit P4, delimiting the wards of the Municipality. Exhibit P1 is the report submitted by the 3rd respondent along with sketch. Exhibit P2 is the copy of the objection submitted by the petitioner.2. Mainly it is contended that the order was passed without considering any of the objections. The main ground taken in the writ petition is that without considering the objections, proceedings have been finalised by the Delimitation Commission.3. As directed by this Court, the 1st respondent has filed a statement with regard to the specific objections raised by the petitioner. Explanations have been given from paragraph 8 onwards. It is pointed out that the objections raised by the petitioner were enquired through the Deputy Director of Agriculture and in the enquiry report it is stated that if the demand/proposal ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »