Kerala Court September 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.
Thomas Malieckal Vs. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and An ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-25-2015
1. The petitioner is the 2nd accused in C.C.No.7/2014 pending before the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kottayam, for the offences punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and Sections 409, 465, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The petitioner is a former Government employee, who has retired from service as an Executive Engineer from the Irrigation Department. While he was working as the Assistant Executive Engineer, Poverty Alleviation Unit, Idukki, he was the officer responsible for the construction work of the play ground of the Government Vocational Higher Secondary School, Devikulam, which was completed during January, 2007. The Vigilance Department, on investigation, prepared a factual report and placed it before the Government seeking sanction to prosecute the petitioner, alleging that the petitioner along with others had swindled an amount of Rs.80,257/- in completing the said work,...
Suo Motu Proceedings Initiated On A Communication Received From The Se ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-25-2015
1. This is a criminal revision initiated under Section 401 Cr.P.C. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Special Mobile Squad, Wayanad filed final report against the accused alleging offences under Sections 324 and 294(b) IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the 'special Act') in Crime No.413/2013 of Vellamunda Police Station. 2. On receipt of the final report and on a perusal of the records, the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Mananthavady was satisfied that the case against the accused is exclusively triable by the Court of Session, Kalpetta. Therefore, the matter was treated as CP.15/2014 and the learned Magistrate committed the case against the accused to the Court of Session, Kalpetta. 3. On getting the matter committed, the learned Sessions Judge, Kalpetta has entertained a doubt as to whether the matter could be committed to the Court of Session, Kalpetta, since a special c...
Marykutty Daniel and Another Vs. State of Kerala represented by The Pu ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-25-2015
1. The prayer in this Criminal Miscellaneous Case instituted under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking invocation of the inherent powers conferred on this Court as per that provision, is for an order from this Court to quash the impugned Annexure-A1 FIR in Crime No.1139/2014 of Konni Police Station, Pathanamthitta District. The impugned crime has been registered against the petitioners for offences punishable under Sec. 3(2) r/w Secs. 17 and 18 of the Kerala Money Lenders Act 1958 and Sec.45S of the Reserve Bank of India Act 1934. The crime has been registered on the basis of Annexure-A1(a) letter dated 15/05/2012 sent by the Deputy General Manager of Reserve Bank of India to the Director General of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Police Head Quarters, Thiruvananthauram. It has been intimated in the said letter that the partnership firm called Pathanamthitta Popular Finance owned by the petitioners has been engaged in financial activities such as extending gold loans, Fo...
P.G. Vijayan and Another Vs. Mohanan and Another
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-25-2015
Sunil Thomas, J. 1. The appellants herein who are the appellants in A.S.No.54 of 2013 of the lower appellate court are aggrieved by the dismissal of I.A.No.774 of 2013, by which they sought an ad interim order of prohibitory injunction. 2. The first appellant is the owner of the plaint A schedule property and the first respondent is his brother. On the western side of the A schedule property, there are properties belonging to the respondents herein. The appellant claimed that a thondu on the western side was developed jointly by the appellants and the respondents into a wider way. After widening it, first respondent allegedly started claiming exclusive right of the way and attempted to block it. Hence, a suit was filed seeking an injunction with respect to the plaint B schedule way. After trial, the suit was dismissed which was carried in appeal by the plaintiff, to the appellate court. Along with the appeal, an interlocutory application was filed seeking an interim injunction against ...
The President, Peechi Service Co-Operative Bank, Thrissur and Another ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-23-2015
Ashok Bhushan, C.J. 1. This Appeal has been filed by a Co-operative Bank and its President who were respondent Nos.5 and 4 to the Writ Petition filed by three petitioners, members of the Managing Committee of the Bank, challenging the proceedings initiated by the Bank for their expulsion from primary membership of the Bank. The learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition directing that the petitioners shall continue to be the members of the Bank. 2. The parties shall be referred to as described in the Writ Petition. 3. Brief facts of the case giving rise to this Writ Appeal are: Writ Petitioners were elected as members of the Managing Committee of the Bank (Directors of Board of Management of the Bank) on 05.09.2012. Petitioners 1 to 3 and other members of the Managing Committee sent a complaint dated 15.07.2013 to the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Thrissur making allegations against the Secretary of the Bank. Again a complaint dated 07.09.2013 was submitted by the petit...
Karunakaran @ Kannan Vs. Abdul Rasheed and Others
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-23-2015
Babu Mathew P. Joseph, J. 1. The appellant sustained serious injuries in a motor accident that occurred on 11-03-2005 by knocking him down by a car while he was walking along the side of the road. He has preferred a petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tirur, claiming compensation on account of the injuries sustained in the accident. The learned Tribunal, after considering the matter, found that the accident had occurred due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the car and awarded a total compensation of Rs.40,000/- under various heads as follows: Transport to hospitalRs.1,000/-Damages to clothingRs.500/-Expenses for bystanderRs.1,500/-Extra-nourishmentRs.1,000/-Medical billsRs.8,800/-Pain and sufferingRs.10,000/-Loss of amenitiesRs.8,000/-Loss of earningsRs.9,000/-TotalRs.39,800/-(Rounded to Rs.40,000/-) The third respondent Insurance Company was directed to deposit the amount. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appella...
J. Sreelakshmi Vs. State of Kerala represented by its Secretary To Gov ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-23-2015
Ashok Bhushan, C.J. 1. This Writ Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 13.07.2015 in W.P(C) No.18941 of 2015 which Writ Petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge. 2. Parties shall be referred as described in the Writ Petition. 3. Brief facts giving rise to this Writ Appeal are: Petitioner as well as the 4th respondent were selected for Post Graduate Medical Course for the year 2015-16. Petitioner obtained rank No.3108 whereas the 4th respondent obtained rank No.3232. Option given by the petitioner was for allotment of Post Graduate Forensic Medicine course and her first option was Thiruvananthapuram Medical College. The 4th respondent also gave the same option. In the third counselling petitioner was allotted seat for Post Graduate Medical Course in Forensic Medicine at the T.D. Medical College, Alappuzha. The Government took a decision to conduct spot admission on 9th June, 2015 in order to allow the candidates who got allotment in Gover...
Kadakampally Manoj Vs. Kerala State Cashew Development Corporation Ltd ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-23-2015
P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J. 1. The petitioner is before this Court by way of this 'Public Interest Litigation', projecting various deeds and misdeeds alleged on the part of the second and third respondents with regard to the affairs of the first respondent company, in their capacity as the Managing Director and the Chairman respectively, resulting in Crores of loss to the public exchequer, involving various offences under the relevant provisions of law, which are essentially sought to be enquired into by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI for short) because of the extensive nature of operations involving procurement of Raw Cashew Nuts (RCN in short) from different places in India and abroad and sale of cashew kernels by way of shady transactions, in violation of the pre-set norms/guidelines/instructions. 2. The challenge is mainly based on various reports prepared and submitted by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (Exts. P2 to P4 - 9th respondent), the reports submitted...
M/s. Karimpanal Arcade Owner's Welfare Association represented by its ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-23-2015
1. These writ petitions are filed questioning the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Disaster Management Act 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the DM Act ). Since common questions of law are involved in all these cases, these writ petitions are disposed of by a common judgment. FACTS: 2. W.P.(C).No. 26377/2015: 2.i. The petitioner claims ownership of a land in Survey No.560/364 of Vanchiyoor Village in Thiruvananthapuram Taluk, Thiruvananthapuram District. He has been served with a notice under Section 34(k) of the DM Act. Ext.P8 is the said notice. The notice directs him to show cause against proposed demolition and removal of the structures and buildings belonging to him. It is stated in the notice that the petitioner had constructed a building above the underground arched conduit portion of the Thekkenekara Canal situated in Survey No.560/364. The notice was issued by the District Collector in the capacity as the Chairman of the District Disaster Management Authority, ...
M.V. Mathai, H.S.A. (Ss) Retd Vs. The Accountant General (AandE), Kera ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Sep-22-2015
1. The petitioner is a retired HSA from an Aided High School. He demitted his office on 31.3.2007. Though the petitioner claimed his qualifying service as 27 years and though it is stated so in the pension book, the first respondent has accepted it only as 26 years 5 months and 29 days and as the fraction service is one day short of 6 months, it was rounded to 26 years only. Therefore, the alleged shortage of one day has become crucial for pensionary benefits, which is, disbursed on the basis of qualifying service. Therefore, the petitioner was granted benefits of gratuity, commutation and pension for 26 years only. The basis of calculation, as to how the qualifying service is fixed as 26 years 5 months 29 days, is shown in Ext.P7. In Ext.P7, the qualifying service is short of one day only to claim the benefit of 27 years. The petitioner points out that the first respondent has committed a grave mistake in the above calculation, as the impact and effect of 6 leap years intervened durin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »