Kerala Court July 2012 Judgments

Kerala State Electricity Board, Vydhuthi Bhavan, Pattom, Thiruvanantha ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. K. CHANDRADAS NADAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER The appellants were the opposite parties in CC.97/08 in the CDRF, Alappuzha. The sole respondent was the complainant. She was a consumer of electricity supplied by the opposite parties. She alleged that she was running a small scale production unit in the name and style Kottezham Rubber Products. For that purpose three phase connection included in LT IV tariff was taken by her. She was remitting the energy charges from time to time as per bills issued by the opposite parties. While so on 1.9.09 the Anti Power Theft squad of the opposite parties inspected the premises of the complainant and slapped on her a bill for Rs.2,41,584/-. As per the mahazar prepared by the opposite parties there was no allegation to the effect that complainant had effected any sort of manipulation in the meters. The bill was prepared on some unfounded surmises. The complainant was also required to remit surcharge of Rs.37,701/-. She was asked to remit the amounts in 1...

Jayamala Vs. State of Kerala and Another

Court: Kerala

1. Crl.M.C.No.3910 of 2011 is filed by the 1st and 2nd accused, both of them together, and Crl.M.C.No.3796 of 2011 and W.P.(C).No.26840 of 2011 are by the 3rd accused, in a case pending on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ranni. 2. In the above case cognizance of the offences under Section 120B and 295A of the Indian Penal Code, for short the ‘IPC’, has been taken against all the three accused by the learned Magistrate on a charge filed by the Superintendent of Police, CBCID, EOW-II, Kottayam in Crime No.144/CR/KTM/07 of Crime Branch, Kottayam Police Station. The aforesaid crime was initially registered against accused Nos.1 and 2 and one V.S.Rajagopalan Nair @ Rajan for offences punishable under Sections 295 and 120B of the IPC. During the course of investigation, the aforesaid Rajan was removed from the array of the accused and the present 3rd accuse (A3) was included. 3. The gravamen of the facts leading to the registration of the crime and later in...

Dr. Shyama Manoj Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

K.M. Joseph, J. Petitioner secured admission to the DCH Course in the Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram on the strength of her rank in the All India Entrance Examination. She also wrote the Examination held by the State Government. She secured rank No. 967. Petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste Community. In the list of Scheduled Caste Community, her rank is 18. She had participated in the First and Second round counseling held by the second respondent. By Ext.P3, the second respondent after the final round of the All India allotment, notified the final round allotment process for the State quota seats vide Ext.P3. Petitioner obtained Ext.P4 No Objection Certificate from the Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram. One seat of M. D. in Paediatrics was reserved for the Scheduled Caste candidates in the fourth respondent College. According to petitioner, she is entitled to allotment to the said seat reserved for Scheduled Caste candidate. By Ext.P7, however, she has b...

Jacob Mathew and Another Vs. Manikantan Alias G. Mani and Another

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2012(3)KLT824

1. Petitioners are the accused in a pending case on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kollam. That case has arisen on a private complaint filed by the 1st respondent alleging commission of offences under Sections 499, 500, 501 and 502 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused persons - printer and publisher of a daily and its editor. 2. In the Malayala Manorama daily, in its Kollam Edition, published on 21.08.2008, four photographs over an incident were published, in which, one photograph showed the complainant more or less nude, and, that, publication has caused defamation and harm to him, was the case presented by the complainant to prosecute the printer and publisher and also the editor of the above daily for the offences stated supra. The learned Magistrate, recording the sworn statement of the complainant, ordered summons to the petitioners, the accused persons. Cognizance taken of the offences against them on the complaint is ...

Salim and Another Vs. State of Kerala to Be Represented by the Secreta ...

Court: Kerala

Both the petitioners are before this Court seeking for a direction to the 6th respondent Sub Registrar to accept and register a document without insisting for production of No Objection Certificate from the Revenue Department. 2. The 1st petitioner has got 3.46 Ares property in Survey No.20/1 of Kannan Devan Hills Village at Devikulam by virtue of patta No.160 in LA 28/99/KDH dated 26.03.1999. Ext.P1 is a true copy of the patta and Ext.P2 is produced to show that the property has been mutated in the name of the 1st petitioner. An extent of 4.500 cents was sold by the 1st petitioner to the 2nd petitioner by sale deed dated 27.10.2000 produced as Ext.P3. Now they want to sell the properties after executing agreements, copies of which are produced as Exts.P4 and P5. 3. According to the petitioners, the 6th respondent is refusing to register the document for non production of No Objection Certificate from the Revenue Department and the petitioners rely upon the decision of a Division Bench...

Baby Chakripani Vs. CochIn University of Science and Technology Thrikk ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2012(4)KLT11(SN)(C.No.12)

C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. 1. Writ Appeal is filed against judgment of the learned Single Judge declining to interfere with the Selection of the 6th respondent as Head of the Department of Atmospheric Sciences in Cochin University which is claimed by appellant by rotation. We have heard Senior counsel Sri. K. Ramakumar appearing for the appellant and Standing Counsel appearing for the Cochin University. 2. The appellant is a Selection Grade Lecturer in the department, who after implementation of the UGC scheme got re-designated as Associate Professor. Appellant’s specific case is that Associate Professor is equal to Reader and so much so, appellant is holding the post not below the rank of Reader and, therefore, he is entitled to be appointed as Head of the Department by rotation. The provision based on which appellant claims appointment as Head of the Department on rotation basis is Statute 18 of the Cochin University of Science and Technology First Statute, 1991 which is as fol...

Jalaja Dileep, Ernakulam District Vs. the Revenue Divisional Officer, ...

Court: Kerala

1. The writ petition is filed by the petitioner mainly seeking for a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to effect necessary correction in the basic tax register based on Exts.P5 to P7 certificates showing the property covered by Ext.P1 title deed, by deleting the words 'Wet Land'. The circumstances under which the writ petition is filed, are the following: 2. The petitioner is the joint owner of an extent of 12.286 cents of land comprised in Survey No.330/3 of Elamkulam Village in Ernakulam District. The petitioner's mother-in-law, late Smt. Meera Ben purchased the said property as per Ext.P1 sale deed of the year 1972. She died on 12.3.1994 leaving behind her husband Shri Ramakrishnan, son Shri K.R. Dileep and daughter Smt. Devika. Both Shri Ramakrishnan and Shri Dileep are no more. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of Shri K.R. Dileep. The property has been mutated in the name of the legal heirs of late Meera Ben including the petitioner and Ext.P2 is the true copy of the tax re...

Dr. Sivananda N.R. Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2012(3)KLT446; 2012(3)ILR(Ker)592; 2012(3)KLJ431

Petitioner is the 1st accused in a case pending on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kasaragod. The above case arose from crime registered by the Kasaragod police station for the offence punishable under Section 304(A) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. One Vijayan, husband of the de facto complainant, was admitted in Kasaragod United Hospital to undergo surgery for hernia on 04.01.2008. Allegedly, due to complications arising from the application of anesthesia by the petitioner, who is an anesthesiologist, on the same day, just preceding the operation fixed, condition of Vijayan became critical and his operation could not be performed and he had to be rushed for better care to a hospital in Mangalore and, later, to another hospital in Manipal. On account of the anesthetic complications arising from the reckless application of anesthesia by the petitioner, it is alleged, Vijayan breathed his last on 14.01.2008 while undergoing treatment in a hospital in Ma...

The Kerala State Co-operative Employees Pension Board Represented by I ...

Court: Kerala

Abdul Rehim, J. The Kerala State Co-operative Employees Pension Board is the appellant in these two appeals. The party respondents in these appeals, who were petitioners before the single Judge, were employees of co-operative Societies retired from service on attaining superannuation on different dates, within the years of 2004 to 2009. Issue involved in these appeals pertains to interpretation of clause 22 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Employees’ Self-Financing pension Scheme 1994. The method for calculation of pension to which a retired employee is entitled is prescribed under that clause, which says that the amount of superannuation pension other than the family pension need be determined on the basis of the length of service, based on a method of calculation indicated therein, i.e., the average pay multiplied with qualifying service and divided by 60. The ‘average pay’ is defined in the scheme as the average of pay drawn by an employee of a society during t...

Lijeesh Vs. State of Kerala, Represented by the Sub Inspector of Polic ...

Court: Kerala

Petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.920 of 2011 of Tirur Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Section 353 and 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Investigation of that crime is now in progress. Petitioner has been enlarged on bail after his arrest on production before the Magistrate, subject to creation conditions which, among others, directed his to surrender his passport. Condition imposed to direct surrender of passport, after its production before the court, and his release from custody, is challenged invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as illegal and unsustainable, The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on Suresh Nanda v. C.B.I. ((2008) 3 SCC 674) to contend that retention of the passport even by order of the court would amount to impounding of that document, which cannot be done otherwise than under the provisions of the Passport Act. I do not find any merit i...