Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1998Ker171
S. Marimuthu, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment delivered by the District Judge, Kollam in A.S. No. 123 of 1989 dated 22-11-1991. The appellants are the legal representatives of the second defendant who were brought on record as defendants 6 to 8 on the; demise of the second defendant. The original plaintiff Mytheen Kunju Abdul Rehman Kunju died pending the first appeal. Therefore his legal representatives have been brought on record as plaintiffs 2 to 5 who are the respondents along with other defendants 1, 3, 4 and 5. 2. The deceased plaintiff filed O.S. No. 622/ 83 before the Munsiff Court, Quilon for declaration of title and possession of the plaint schedule property, to set aside Ext. B2 sale deed and Ext. B3 hypothecation deed and for prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from committing trespass into the suit property and from interfering with the enjoyment of the plaintiff. The plaint schedule property is 30 cents. The case of the plaintiff for cons...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR2007Ker269
ORDERPius C. Kuriakose, J.1. In this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner, who is a power of attorney holder of the 2nd defendant in a suit for recovery of money filed by the first respondent bank, challenges Ext. PI order by which the learned Subordinate Judge dismissed an application filed by him for leave to represent his principal in the suit. The interlocutory application was filed by the petitioner under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Rule 22 of the Civil Rules of Practice producing power of attorney dated 18-1-2003 executed by the 2nd defendant in the suit in his favour and Ext. PI is the order on that application.2. A counter affidavit was filed to the application by the respondent bank wherein the objections were to the effect that the power of attorney is not attested by witnesses and that the same has not been duly authenticated by the notary. The objections found favour with the learned Subordinate Judge who took the view...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2005(4)KLT685
ORDERM. Sasidharan Nambiar, J.1. First respondent filed a complaint before Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kozhikode alleging that the five accused shown therein committed offences under Sections 7, 10, 11, 13 and 15 of the Prevention of Corruption of Act, 1988 (for short PC. Act). First accused was the then Minister for Education and second accused, the then Principal Secretary, Education Department, State of Kerala: 5th accused was an Ex-MLA and accused 3 and 4 are leaders of Indian Union Muslim League, one of the ruling political parties in Kerala. Petitioners in Crl.R.P. 1215705 were the original accused 3 and 4 who are now arrayed as accused 1 and 2. Revision petitioner in Crl.R.P.1135/05 is the 5th accused who is now arrayed as third accused. They are challenging the order of Enquiry Commissioner for Special Judge, dated 14.2.05 whereunder charge for the offence under Section 9 of the Act read with Section 34 of IPC was framed against accused 1 to 3. The learned Special J...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : II(2005)DMC658
V. Ramkumar, J.1. In this appeal preferred from the Central Prison, Thiruvanathapuram, the first accused in S.C. No. 256/2000 on the file of the Addl. Sessions Court, Thodupuzha challenges the conviction entered and the sentences passed against him for offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 302 read with Section 34, IPC.2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows :The first accused (appellant herein) was living at Arakkulam along with his wife Latha. On 26.3.2000, at about 2 p.m. he struck his wife on her cheeks and face causing the dislocation of one tooth of the lower jaw. Subsequently, on the same day at about 7 p.m. the first accused intentionally caused her death by throttling her. Thereafter, in furtherance of the common intention of the first and 2nd accused to cause disappearance of the evidence of the offence and to screen the first accused from legal punishment, both the accused together poured kerosene over the dead body of Latha in front of the hous...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (2005)199CTR(Ker)279; 2006(3)KLT251
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioners are husband and wife. First petitioner herein was a professor in Pathology of the Calicut Medical College and was running a proprietary concern by name 'Santhosh Clinic'. He is an assessee with P.A. No. 46-007-PX-7697. Second petitioner, wife of the first petitioner, retired as a professor of Dermatology and is a private practitioner and is an assessee with P.A. No. 46-007-PQ-9485.2. IT Department had received information that one Hamza, proprietor, Hotel Sagar, Mavoor Road, Calicut had purchased the residential house belonging to the petitioners at Mavoor Road, Calicut, for a consideration of Rs. 72 lakhs in the name of his children and the petitioners in turn purchased another residential property at Sathram Road, Calicut, belonging to Dr. N.M. Mathai and his son George Mathai for a sum of Rs. 59 lakhs. Enquiry conducted by the Investigation Wing of the Department revealed that petitioners had sold their residential house with 11.5 cents of land a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1998Ker265
ORDERS. Marimuthu, J.1. The additional defendants 3 and 6 are the appellants. The legal representatives of the original plaintiff, additional defendants 4 to 6 and 7 to 11 are the respondents.2. The deceased plaintiff Aliyamma Thomas filed a suit O.S. No. 54 of 1971 for recovery of item Nos. 1 and 2 after the removal of the shed and the lean -- to in item Nos. 1 and 2 and also for injunction restraining the defendants from putting up any construction. The plaint was amended thereafter for future mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 35/- per month. Plaint item No. 1 is a piece of land measuring 47 ft. x 42 ft. with a workshop. Plaint item No. 2 is 30 ft. x 25 ft. with a lean--to the shed located in item No. 1. Item No. 3 is a vacant site measuring 30 ft. x 30 ft. lying infront of item Nos. 1 and 2 for the use of ingress and egress. No relief is sought for item No. 3. The plaintiff with the above averments further added in the plaint as follows :On 1-1-1963 in the plaint item No. 1 the defen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2005CriLJ4696
K. Padmanabhan Nair, J.1. The State/complainant In Sessions Case 80/ 1996 on the file of the Sessions Court, Kollam is the appellant in this appeal. The respondent was charge sheeted in Crime No. 313/1995 of Kottiyam Police Station alleging that he committed an offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code.2. The prosecution case was that at about 8.20 a.m. on 21-11-1995 the respondent committed the murder of one Remanan with the intention and knowledge that his act was likely to cause the death of Remanan. It was alleged that the respondent stabbed Remanan with a knife on the left side of his back and when Remanan turned round, the respondent again stabbed him on the right side of his chest. The victim succumbed to the injuries.3. PW-2 (H. Rajan) gave Ext. PI F. I. statement before PW-8, (S. S. Firoz) the Sub-Inspector of Police who recorded the same and registered Ex.Pl(a) First Information Report. The subsequent investigation was conducted by PW-9, (K. A. John) the Circl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2003(3)KLT918
C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The petitioners in all these cases are challenging the constitutional validly of Section 5A of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975, hereinafter called 'the Act' which provides for the levy of luxury tax at a flat rate of Rs. 2000 payable every year on residential buildings with plinth area of 278.7 Square Metres or more and the construction of which is completed on or after 1st April, 1999. Though the challenge is essentially on the constitutional validly of Section 5A the Act, in some cases there is factual dispute with regard to the plinth area assessed.2. I heard the various counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. The respondents have also filed a counter in O.P. 13766/2002 with a prayer to treat its counter affidavit for all the cases. The impugned Section is extracted hereunder.'5A. Charge of luxury tax :- (i) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be charge a lux...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR2004Ker62; II(2004)BC498; 2003(3)KLT1011
Pius C. Kuriakose, J.1. The Nedungadi Bank Ltd. (Original decree-holder) and the Punjab National Bank, its successor by amalgamation (the present decree-holder) are the appellants. The appeal is directed against an order passed by the executing Court dismissing an application filed by the original decree-holder for cancellation of sale on grounds of fraud and material irregularity.2. Heard Sri. K.P. Balasubramanian, counsel for the appellants and Sri. C.M. Andrews, counsel for the 15th respondent as well as Sri. M.P. Ashok Kumar, counsel for the 13th and 14th respondents. Perused the lower court records.3. The decree was one for sale of immovable properties based on a mortgage in favour of the original decree-holder. A-schedule to the decree had four items of immovable properties out of which item No. 4 was situated outside the local limits of the Payyannur Sub Court wherein the execution proceedings were initiated. As on the date of the execution petition, ie., 27.8.1991, the amount d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2005(1)KLT807
J.B. Koshy, J.1. Appellants in Crl.A. No. 1050/2003 were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life each with a fine of Rs. 20,000/- each and in default of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years each. Altogether six persons were charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of I.P.C. The Sessions Court acquitted accused 4 to 6 of all the offences and also acquitted accused 1 to 3 of offences under Sections 143, 147, 148 and 149 of I.P.C, but convicted them under Section 302 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. Against the acquittal of the accused 4 to 6, P.W.1 filed Crl.R.P. No. 2450/2004 and both the cases were heard together.2. The prosecution case was that P.W.1 along with deceased Jose had been running toddy shops at the places, namely, Vellilappally, Vellakkada and Chakkampuzha Nirappu in the year 1999. The accused persons who were the todd...
Tag this Judgment!