Kerala Court October 2015 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. Jaladharan Vs. State of Kerala represented by Chief Secretary To Go ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-08-2015
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Senior Counsel for the third respondent, Lok Ayukta; and the learned Government Pleader. The writ petitioner is the appellant. The situation in hand is a direct result of the enormous delay on the part of the Government in formulating the service rules for the staff of the Lok Ayukta. 2. Sometime in 1999 the institution of Lok Ayukta came into being in the State of Kerala. Following that, the office of Lok Ayukta had to be manned by appropriate staff. Services were lent including by offering staff of High Court of Kerala. The writ appellant/writ petitioner is one among them. 3. The fact of the matter remains that even as of now, the service rules as far as the Lok Ayukta staff are concerned had not been formulated. With the passage of time, it became necessary to have the post of Additional Registrar. The method of recruitment to that post was as discernible from the Government orders th...
St.Mary's Orthodox Church, Vettipuram, Pathanamthitta, Rep. by its Vic ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-2015
1. This Regular Second Appeal essentially arises out of the challenge made as against the permission granted by the statutory authorities concerned for the establishment of a vault type cemetery in the appellant St.Mary's Orthodox Church, Vettipuram, Pathanamthitta district. The contesting respondents herein had filed Original Suit, O.S.No.57/1999 before the Munsiff's Court, Pathanamthitta, praying to set aside the impugned orders issued by the statutory authorities concerned in the matter of permission for construction of a vault type cemetery by the St.Mary's Orthodox Church authorities concerned (respondents 5 and 6 in the O.S.) and for consequential injunction. The trial court has decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiffs. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment and decree rendered by the Munsiff's Court, Pathanamthitta, on 29.9.2000 in O.S.No.57/1999, the church authorities had filed Appeal Suit, before the District Court concerned. The lower appellate court, as per the impugned jud...
Dr. Vincent Panikulangara Vs. State of Kerala, Represented by Secretar ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-2015
Ashok Bhushan, CJ. 1. This Writ Petition filed as a Public Interest Litigation seeks enforcement of statutory Rules framed by the State and Circulars issued prescribing wearing of uniform by the Officers of the Metrology Department of the State of Kerala. Petitioner, an Indian citizen and a practising Advocate complains about the non-wearing of uniform by the Officers in violation of the statutory provisions and Circulars and inaction on the part of the State and its Officers in taking appropriate action. FACTS 2. Petitioner's case in the Writ Petition is that under the Acts enacted by the Parliament Rules have been framed by the State which provides for wearing of uniform by Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology, Senior Inspector and Inspector of Metrology while on duty in the office or in field. Petitioner in the Writ Petition has referred to various Circulars issued by the State Government and the Controller of Weights and Measures emphasising on wearing of uniform by Inspectors a...
M/s. Indira Motor Service, Kannur represented by its Managing Partner ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-2015
1. This second appeal raises the following substantial questions of law: (i) When the renewal clause in a lease deed expressly incorporates the renewal clause also as one of the terms of renewal, does the term of the lease expire with one renewal or only on expiry of two consecutive terms? (ii) Whether the terms of Ext.A1 lease deed have been correctly interpreted by the lower courts in limiting the term of renewal to twenty years alone? (iii) Whether a finding not required for the determination of the lis will operate as res judicata in a subsequent suit? 2. Relevant facts, shortly stated, are thus: Defendants 1 to 3 in a suit for recovery of vacant possession of the plaint schedule property and also for realisation of money are the appellants. Plaintiff is the contesting respondent. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as the plaintiff and defendants. 3. Property described in the plaint schedule belonged to deceased Panakkad Abdul Khader. He had created the comme...
Geetha Ramanujan Vs. Estate Manager, Cochin Port Trust, Cochin and Oth ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-07-2015
Ashok Bhushan, CJ. 1. These two writ appeals have been filed against a common judgment dated 14.07.2015 dismissing W.P.(C) No.19292 of 2014 and W.P.(C) No. 5284 of 2015. The parties shall be referred to as described in the writ petitions. The facts and issues raised in both these writ appeals are more or less similar, hence it shall be sufficient to refer to the pleadings in W.P.(C) No.19292 of 2014 giving rise to WA No.1704 of 2015 for deciding both the appeals. The facts which emerged from the pleadings of the parties are: The Cochin Port Trust (hereinafter referred to as 'Port Trust') has granted various lands on lease to different parties in exercise of its power under Section 33 of Major Port Trusts Act, 1963. An area of 49.56 cents of land in plot No.25 at G.V. Iyer Road, Cochin Wellington Island was granted on lease to one V.K. Rajaram on 30.09.1961. A copy of the lease deed has been brought on record as Ext.P1 to W.P.(C) No.19292 of 2014. The petitioner is an assignee from the ...
M/s. CHI Commodities Handlers Inc., rep. by its Authorised Signatory, ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-2015
1. These original petitions are arising from the orders passed by the District Court, Kollam rejecting preliminary objection raised by the petitioners on the maintainability of Original Petitions (Arbitration) filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Arbitration Act, 1996 ). Since common questions of law are involved in all these original petitions, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The petitioners in all these original petitions are one and the same, namely, a Canadian entity, which has raised a claim against the respondents invoking Arbitration clause in accordance with the Arbitration procedure of the Association of Food Industries (Inc.) (for short, AFI ). The relevant clause of Arbitration is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this contract or breach thereof shall be settled by Arbitration in New York, NY, by the Association of food industries in Inc in accordance with its rules an...
Mary Tharian and Another Vs. Kerala State Electricity Board, represent ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-2015
1. The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P9 order passed by the additional 5th respondent, principally on the ground that the incumbent in the office of the Additional District Magistrate, who had heard the petitioner on the objections against the drawing of an electric line for effecting electric connection to the building of the beneficiaries, was different from the incumbent in the same office, who passed Ext.P9 order. The petitioner therefore, alleges violation of the principles of natural justice while passing Ext.P9 order. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents as also the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Board. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, and taking note of the submission of the learned Government Pleader on instructions, that the incumbent in the Office of the Additional Di...
D. Geethakrishnan Vs. The State Election Commission and Others
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-2015
1. The issue pertains to the reservation of the wards in the Corporation of Kollam for the ensuing election to the local bodies in terms of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 ['the Act' for short]. Article 243 T of the Constitution of India provides for the reservation of seats for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes including women in every Municipality. The number of seats so reserved shall be proportionate to the population of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Municipal area when compared to the total population of that area. The State Government has fixed the number of seats to be reserved for Scheduled Castes in the category of women in the Corporation of Kollam as 2 only. Seats have also been reserved for women to the extent of 50% of the total number including those belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under the Act. Both Article 243 T of the Constitution of India as well as Rule 6 of the Act speak of reservation by 'rotation' to the different c...
M/s. Cochin Blue Metal Industries (P) Ltd., represented by its Directo ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-2015
1. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the KVAT Act, engaged in the business of production of granite metal and M- sand. In connection with the said business, the petitioner had installed at his unit primary as well as secondary crushers. Over and above the said machinery, the petitioner had also installed an Auto Sand Machine for the purposes of producing M-sand. For the purposes of assessment under the KVAT Act, the petitioner opted for payment of tax on compounded basis in terms of S.8 of the KVAT Act, and the revenue authorities accepted his application for the same. The petitioner accordingly filed returns and paid tax as contemplated under S. 8 of the KVAT Act. 2. Pursuant to an inspection conducted at his unit by the revenue authorities, the petitioner was served with Ext.P1 notice by the 1st respondent proposing to impose a penalty on the petitioner for suppressing the actual production of granite metal and M-sand produced in the unit. The basis for the said notice was ...
S. Prabhullakumar Vs. State of Kerala, represented by The Public Prose ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-06-2015
1. Annexure-B order passed by the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram in Crl.M.P.No.85/2013 in CC No.35/2009 is under challenge. The petitioner stands indicted before the court below for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 13(1) (d) of that Act. The petitioner has seriously challenged the legality and validity of the sanction for prosecution before the court below within the provisions of Section 19 of the said Act. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the authority, who has granted the so-called sanction in the case, is not the authority who could remove the petitioner from service and, therefore, there is no valid sanction as contemplated under Section 19 of the Act. 2. According to the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the court below has taken the said question lightly and has simply discarded the said contention raised by the petitioner by stating in Annexure-B orde...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »