Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jun-03-2014
..... provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall be deemed to make any contravention before the commencement of the insecticides (amendment) act, 1977, of a condition of a certificate of registration granted before such commencement, an offence punishable under this act. (3b) where the registration committee is of opinion that the insecticide is being introduced for the first time in india ..... w.a. nos.617/2012 & others 23 other law for the time being in force. the foreign trade act was enacted after the act in the year 1992. the foreign trade act repeals the import and export control act 1947. going by m/s. indian c. & p works state of a.p.(supra) words "law in force" will take in future law also ..... other law for the time being in force (in this case the foreign trade act). in fact, the expression 'time being in force' takes in future w.a. nos.617/2012 & others 5 law, he submits. in this regard, he relies on the decision in m/s. indian c. & p. works v. state of a.p. (air64(ap) 430). .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-06-2014
..... appeal no.10/05 :2. : any damages, decree for recovery of damages could not have been allowed. it is also contended that section 34 of the act was omitted by indian divorce (amendment) act, 2001 w.e.f. 3/10/2001 and therefore, the decree could not have been passed on 21st of june, 2004 allowing recovery of damages.4. both ..... these contentions will have to be answered in the light of the provisions contained in section 34 of the act, as it stood prior to the amendment. this section ..... to a provision conferring substantive rights, unless it is clarified by the legislature itself that the amendment or omission will be retrospective, such amendment or omission is always prospective.8. in so far as this case is concerned, section 34 of the divorce act, which was omitted w.e.f. 3/10/2001, is not a procedural provision and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Sep-22-2014
..... petitioners herein, challenged the recommendations of the wage boards and the notification dated 11.11.2011 mainly on the following grounds:- (i) constitutional validity of the act and the amendment act, 1974. (ii) improper constitution of the wage boards (iii) irregularity in the procedure adopted by majithia wage boards. (iv) majithia wage boards overlooked the ..... the same is also covered as per the reasoning of the constitution bench 25 page 26 decision of this court. therefore, the challenge as to the amendment act, 1974 stands disallowed. 22) although, the aspect of violation of article 14 was intricately decided by the constitution bench, it is the stand of the ..... basis of gross revenue and relied on the observations in indian express newspapers (pvt.) ltd. (supra):- 53 page 54 "16...in view of the amended definition of the "newspaper establishment" under section 2(d) which came into operation retrospectively from the inception of the act and the explanation added to section 10(4), and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-08-2014
..... found untenable, and, in its judgment, this court so pronounced. the apex court after analysing the provisions of the 2006 amendment act came to the definite conclusion that the 2006 amendment act plainly override the decision of the judgment of the supreme high court in mullaperiyar environmental protection forum's case (supra). the ..... 2011 -:82. :- 36. after setting out the principles of separation of power, the apex court proceeded to examine the constitutional validity of the 2006 amendment act. the apex court also referred to its decision in mullaperiyar environmental protection forum's case and laid down the following in paragraphs 125 and 126 which are ..... conservation (amendment) act, 2006. the state of tamil nadu thereafter instituted a suit under article 131 of the constitution before the supreme court against the state of kerala. in the above context the apex court considered the doctrine of separation of power. in paragraph 93 the following was laid down:"3. indian constitution, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Feb-10-2014
..... the copy of wa nos.1444/13 & 121/14 21 the report would generate yearning for hearing before deciding on proof of charge or penalty which forty-second amendment act had advisedly avoided. so while interpreting article 311(2) or relevant rule the court/tribunal should make no attempt to bring on the rail by back track the ..... was portended by the gujarat high court. the attempt must be nailed squarely. prior to the forty-second amendment act the delinquent had no right of hearing before disciplinary authority either on proof of charge or penalty. so after forty-second amendment act it would not be put on higher pedestal. the gujarat high court's decision is, therefore, not ..... intra-court appeal before a division bench.13. it is true that against a proceedings initiated under article 227 of the constitution, section 5 of the high court act does not provide an intra-court appeal to the division bench. however, the objection raised by the learned counsel for the delinquent, can be upheld only if .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Feb-28-2014
..... the matter of payment of gratuity to the employees, it is governed by the payment of gratuity act. as per sub-section (3) of section 4 of the payment of gratuity act, as it stood prior to the w.a.no.1757/09 -7- amendment by act 15 of 2010, the amount of gratuity payable to an employee shall not exceed three lakhs ..... payable to an employee of the appellant-bank to `3.5 lakhs, which was the maximum limit under sub-section (3) of section 4 of the payment of gratuity act during the relevant time and the lic had collected contribution from the bank only for covering the said statutory limit. moreover, in annexure i statement of account the gratuity lying ..... limited the gratuity liability to each of the employees at the maximum amount of `3.5 lakhs provided under sub-section (3) of section 4 of the payment of gratuity act, the employees cannot claim gratuity in excess of statutory limit. paragraph 6 of the judgment of this court in nedupuzha service co-operative bank's case (supra) reads thus:- .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jul-02-2014
..... 7 scc651 the apex court held that even after the repeal of articles 19(1)(f) and 31(1) of the constitution, as per the forty-fourth constitutional amendment act, 1978, with effect from 20.6.1979, though the right to property is no longer a fundamental right in part iii of the constitution, but it still is ..... for the board is that though there are no liabilities outstanding against the petitioner and though the allegations in the aforementioned criminal case arising under the prevention of corruption act, are unrelated to any financial loss caused to the electricity board inasmuch as the allegations are confined to demand of bribe, that w.a.2818/14 - :5 ..... course of hearing of this appeal that after the pronouncement of the impugned judgment, the writ petitioner was convicted for the aforementioned offences under the prevention of corruption act by the competent criminal court on 29.8.2009 and that criminal appeal no.1890/2009, filed against judgment of the court below, is said to be .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-07-2014
..... that the prosecution is incompetent. learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that the learned magistrate could not have taken cognizance on a police report prior to the amendment of the electricity act, 2003 on 15-06-2007. learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that crl.m.c.no.4382 of 2011 2 the entire amount found to be ..... due from the petitioner as energy charges was paid. it is also found by the division bench that the amendment to section 151 of the electricity act is prospective in nature. following is the finding : " a perusal of the aforesaid provisions will clearly indicate that until 15/06/2007 with effect ..... effect from 15/06/2007 with the introduction of first proviso to section 151 crl.m.c.no.4382 of 2011 3 of the act. no body had entertained any doubt prior to the above amendment that there was a statutory interdict against the magistrate taking cognizance on a police report. even the referring judge has made it explicitly .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-20-2014
..... content was found in the samples taken from all these toddy shops. addition of materials like starch being an offence punishable under section 57 (b) of the act in view of the amendment brought to the rules in 2007, the excise w.p (c) nos. 38400/2010, 5546 & 9142 of 2011, 2544 of 2012, & crl.m. ..... and kept for sale under licence issued in kerala shall conform to such specifications and restrictions as may be notified by government, based on scientific studies and indian standard specifications. it was in terms of this provision, the government of kerala issued the government notification dated 14.2.2007 (sro145of 2007) prescribing the specifications ..... drawn from any coconut, palmyra, or choondapana palms, and conforming to such specification and restrictions as may be notified by government, based on scientific studies and indian standard specifications. thus it is quite clear that any licensee or salesman found selling toddy, which does not conform to the definition of toddy under rule 2( .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Nov-17-2014
..... is not a basic structure. article 14 of the constitution in the context of right to property is not a basic feature or basic structure. the constitution 66th amendment act, 1990 bringing the amendment act 8 of 1982 under ninth schedule to the constitution does not destroy the basic structure of the constitution.33. it is true as contended by shri jhaveri that clause ..... .justice p.r.ramachandra menon monday,the17h day of november201426th karthika, 1936 wp(c).no. 26691 of 2010 (j) ---------------------------- petitioner(s): -------------------------- 1. planters forum, aprivate trust registered under the indian trusts act, 1882 having its office in door no.5/214 bye pass road, eranhipalam, calicut-673 006, represented by its secretary.2. dr.chummar chandy, pulicakathaara house, kanjirapilly, kottayam district. by .....
Tag this Judgment!