Kerala Court December 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.
Eliyappadam Sivarajan and Another Vs. Prabhakaran
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-18-2015
1. The defeated defendants in a suit for recovery of possession are the appellants. 2. The suit property measuring 30 cents belonged to one Chathunni Panicker. According to the plaintiff, on the death of Chathunni Panicker, the suit property devolved on his wife Neetti and the plaintiff obtained the same from Neetti in the year 1997 as per Ext.A1 sale deed. It is alleged by the plaintiff that defendants 1 and 2 trespassed into the suit property on 30.11.2002. Chathunni Panicker had two brothers and one sister. Defendants 1 and 2 are the children of the brothers of Chathunni Panicker. They resisted the suit contending that Chathunni Panicker died unmarried and consequently on his death the suit property devolved on his brothers and sister. According to them, on the death of the brothers of Chathunni Panicker, the first defendant and the sister of Chathunni Panicker namely Ammini had released their rights over 10 cents out of the suit property in favour of the second defendant and the se...
P. Selvaraj Vs. State-Wild Life Warden, Wayanad Wild Life Division Sul ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-18-2015
1. Petitioner is the owner of the vehicle bearing registration No.TN 46 E 7279. In 2008 forest officers found the vehicle transporting barks of cinnamon. The goods and the vehicle were seized and OR No.16 of 2008 of Sulthan Bathery Forest Range Office was registered. The vehicle was produced before the authorized officer, who ordered confiscation of the vehicle under Section 61A of the Kerala Forest Act. This was challenged before the District Court in CMA No.4 of 2013. By the impugned order the learned District Judge has confirmed the order of confiscation. Its legality is challenged. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader for the Forests. 3. The district judge found that the petitioner failed to prove that he had taken precautions against the vehicle being used for illegal activities . In this court it is submitted that Section 61A of the Forest Act is not applicable to the facts of the case. The argument is that to attract Section ...
V.M. Kunjumohammed and Others Vs. Venmanad Mahallu Hayathul Islam Comm ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-18-2015
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This matter relates to the Venmanad Muslim Mahallu Jama-ath, the Managing Committee of which is the Muthavally of that Wakf. 3. Five persons filed the suit from which this revision arises, seeking, among other reliefs, perpetual prohibitory injunction restraining defendants 2 and 3 from interfering with the affairs of the aforesaid Jama-ath and also for necessary directions to have an election conducted to the Committee of the Mahallu Jama-ath. 4. It appears that on 8.10.2014, the parties had agreed before the Tribunal that election should be held to elect the office bearers of the Jama-ath as per the bye-laws and as per the voters' list. The Tribunal appointed an Advocate Commissioner to conduct election and directed him to prepare voters' list on the basis of relevant documents like family register etc. The election was to be conducted within a period of three months therefrom. The Advocate Commissioner file...
T.C. Renjith Vs. The State Election Commissioner and Others
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
1. Can a candidate insist for the inspection of the Electronic Voting Machines used for the poll in order to assure himself of the transparency of election otherwise than by an Election Petition ? 2. The petitioner contested from Ward No.8 in Kalady Grama Panchayat and lost the election to the local body by a sizable margin which he least expected. The petitioner entertained a doubt that the Electronic Voting Machines installed in two booths were defective and this paved the way for his ignominious defeat in the election. The petitioner thereupon preferred Ext.P3 representation to the Returning Officer seeking to re-check the Electronic Voting Machines in his presence. The main components of the Electronic Voting Machines used for the poll are stated to be the Detachable Memory Module, the Ballot Unit and the Control Unit. A writ of mandamus has been sought for an expeditious consideration of Ext.P3 representation and not to remove the Electronic Voting Machines from safe custody in th...
The Kerala Aided L.P. and U.P. School, Managers Association, Represent ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
1. Education is serious business; both in terms of the results it seeks to achieve, for the recipients and the returns it offers, to the organizers. Intriguing too, for the looser is the one, who actually imparts it; the Teacher. The State is the most important stake-holder who takes upon itself the financial liability, especially so with respect to elementary education, in the context of Article 21A introduced by the 86th amendment to the Constitution of India. The State has willingly taken up such financial liability considering the balancing and compensatory aspect of nation-building, which good education purports to undertake. However, there is a general tendency to ignore the person who is pivotal in administering education, the teachers, who are often sidelined and whose grievances remain unattended. World over, it is a phenomenon that the teachers, who occupy the highest position in human society are not remunerated, commensurate with such social status. The travails of teachers...
Padmini Vs. Guruvayoor Devaswom represented by its Administrator and A ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
1. Claiming that she is a tenant of the plaint schedule building belonging to the 1st respondent Devaswam the petitioner instituted O.S.No.1199 of 2015 in Munsiff Court, Chavakkad for a perpetual injunction prohibiting it from dispossessing her of the property except in accordance with law and from interfering with her enjoyment thereof. The Devaswam is represented by its chairman, the 2nd respondent. The respondents filed Ext P3 application in the Munsiff Court requesting it to hear the question of maintainability of the suit as, according to them, it has no jurisdiction over the subject matter. By Ext P4 order the learned Munsiff held that in view of the decision in Vasudevan Namboodiri v. Parameswaran Namboodiripad (2014 (3) KLT 386) the Munsiff court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit, and accordingly, he ordered return of the plaint for presentation before the proper court. Its legality challenged in this petition. 2. Heard learned counsel on either side. 3. The dispute inv...
Sebastian Joseph, Managing Director, Joseph Brothers Marketing Pvt Ltd ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
1. The petitioner, being the owner of a vehicle bearing registration No. KL-07-BT-1110, assails Ext.P8 order in the revision, which confirms Exts.P4 and P5 orders by the primary authority and the appellate authority respectively confiscating the petitioner's vehicle. 2. The facts, in brief, are that the Excise Inspector along with his men intercepted the petitioner's vehicle on 18.04.2012 and found Indian Made Foreign Liquor in excess quantity, though purchased from an authorised retail outlet. At the time of inspection, the Inspector found two persons in the vehicle, one being the driver. 3. As is evident from the record and the submissions made by the respective learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents, it can be gathered that the crime registered pursuant to the interception was eventually compounded on the accused s paying Rs. 5000/- as fine. 4. Initially, after the seizure of the vehicle, the primary authority passed Ext.P4 order of confiscation under Section 67B of ...
P.J. Jose and Others Vs. Niyas and Others
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
Ramachandra Menon, J. 1. This appeal preferred by the claimants is in respect of the inadequacy of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in connection with the sad demise of the son of the appellants 1 and 2 and the sibling of the appellants 3 and 4 in a road traffic accident occurred on 11.5.2007. 2. The deceased, who was pursuing his studies for the 2nd year MBA in the Guruvayoorappan Institute of Management in Coimbatore, was proceeding along the road on a motor cycle bearing No.KL-05/K-7553. While so, when he reached the place of occurrence, a jeep bearing No.KL-7/D-2070 owned, driven and insured by the respondents 1, 2 and 3 respectively before the Tribunal knocked him down causing fatal injuries leading to his death occurred on the same date. This was sought to be compensated by filing the claim petition before the Tribunal. 3. The matter was not contested by any of the respondents except the insurance company. No violation of policy/statutory condition was pointed out and the...
K. Thankamma Vs. State of Kerala rep. by Public Prosecutor
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
1. The appellant herein was the Junior Superintendent of Thazhakkara Grama Panchayat from 10.12.1996 to 15.11.1998. She had additional charge of the Secretary of the Panchayat from 10.8.1996 to 15.11.1998. During the said period some amount was allotted to the Panchayat, by the District Labour Officer, Alappuzha as pension for the agricultural workers. On the allegation that from out of the said amount, the accused appropriated an amount of Rs.2,100/- under false vouchers in the name of seven agricultural workers, she faced prosecution before the learned Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), Kottayam in C.C No.1/2008, under Sections 409, 468 and 471 of the IPC and also under Sections 13 (2) r/w 13(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short 'the P.C Act). 2. The accused appeared before the trial court and pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against her under Sections 409, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(c) of the P.C Act...
K.S. Sali Vs. S.I. of Police, Bakel Police Station and Others
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-17-2015
1. This revision petition is preferred against the order in Crl.M.A. 1328/2007 in S.C. No.138/2004 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Adhoc-I, Kasaragod. He was charge sheeted in S.C.No.138/2004 before Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc) I, Kasaragod for having committed an offence punishable u/s.341, 324, 307 r/w.34 IPC. The charge against him was that on 15.5.2001 at 10 'O' clock , while the injured, who are respondents 3 and 4 standing near Beal store shop on the side of Kizhur Juma Mazjid road, A1 and A2 wrongfully restrained the injured and A1 assaulted the injured (the 4th respondent) with a sharp edged knife with the intention to kill him, as a result, he sustained serious injuries on the face and on the stomach. When 3rd respondent intervened the accused attacked him and he also sustained serious injury. Both of them were removed to hospital. In this incident, Bakel Police registered a Crime N0.196/2001 and after completing investigation, laid charge before Judicial First Class Ma...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »