Court : Kerala
..... on the part of the fourth respondent to forcibly evict the petitioner, has eventually submitted in terms of section 492(4) of the kerala municipality act, 1994 ('the act' for brevity) that there is no legal obligation on the petitioner's part to obtain consent from the landlord for the renewal. in support of ..... corporation, in tune with the averments made in the counter affidavit, has strenuously contended that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy under section 509 of the act. he has also further submitted that the petitioner, despite sufficient opportunity given by the respondent corporation, could not obtain the necessary w.p.(c) nos. 18204 ..... have to address the contention raised by the learned standing counsel that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy under section 509 of the act.14. indisputably, section 509 of the act provides an alternative remedy. the fact, however, remains that the writ petition was filed way back in 2012 and subsequently stood admitted .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
..... regard, he placed reliance on maya devi v. krishna bhattathiri, air1981ker.240. contradistinguishing rule 8 of the rules with section 34 of the arbitration & conciliation act, 1996, which seems to be an analogous provision, the learned counsel has contended that rule 8 does not contain any peremptory prohibition against the presentation of the ..... to consolidated engg. enterprises (supra) and sumitomo corporation v. cdc financial services (mauritus) ltd., (2004) 4 scc91 to contend that section 14 of the act can be applied to appeal proceedings.20. heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the second respondent, the learned counsel for the grama ..... exclusion'.29. in union of india v. popular construction co., (2001) 8 scc470 the hon'ble supreme court has dealt with section 34 of the arbitration & conciliation act. their lordships have examined the ratio laid w.p.(c) no. 35078/2014 :17. : down by a constitution bench in vidyacharan shukla v. khubchand baghel, 1951 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
..... fifth respondent is not in strict compliance with sections 4 and 5 of the kerala public wpc1234913 & 12418/13 3 building (eviction of unauthorised occupation) act, 1968 ('the act' for brevity). aggrieved, the petitioners filed w.p. (c)no.23948/2012, pending which the fifth respondent passed exhibit p18 order. the petitioners, ..... the field concerning a developmental activity, it requires judicial deference. more particularly, when all other tenants have surrendered the vacant possession to the fifth respondent, acting on its assurance that once the new shopping complex is put in place, their interests would be taken care of, more particularly given the stipulation ..... of directing the petitioners to file an appeal before the statutory tribunal. apart from submitting exhibit p12 petition under section 191 of the kerala panchayat raj act, the petitioners also filed exhibit p15 appeal before the second respondent, the district collector.4. it seems that the petitioners have also filed appeal no .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
..... shall be subject to the final decision taken by the 2nd respondent in accordance with the provisions of the kerala (scheduled castes & scheduled tribes) regulation of issue of community certificates act, 1996. sd/- a.v. ramakrishna pillai, judge bka/-
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
..... /2006 of kozhikode beypore police. annexure2 copy of private complaint by the petitioner based on which annexure1f.i.r was registered. annexure3 copy of the m.c30of2010under d.v act. annexure4 copy of the agreement between the petitioner and2d respondent. respondents' annexures: nil. //true copy// p.a. to judge. prv. k. ramakrishnan, j.============================== crl ..... in cc3562008 pending in jfcm court v kozhikode, based on annexure 1 kozhikode beypore police crime fir no.85/2006 and annexure 2 private complaint and dv act proceedings in annexure 3 mc30of 2010 by the petitioner against the 2nd respondent and relatives in view of full and final settlement as per annexure 4 agreement." ..... first class magistrate court no-v, kozhikode, against the present second respondent and his sister under the provisions of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005 and that is pending as m.c.no.30/10 before that court. it is alleged in the petition that due to the intervention of mediators .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
..... the least dangerous branch observes that judicial review is a counter-majoritarian force in our system, since when the supreme court declares unconstitutional a legislative act or the act of an elected executive, it thus thwarts the will of the representatives of the people; it exercises control, not on behalf of the ..... any objective behind section 56a to sustain the rational nexus with the differentia. 116. this court, therefore, cannot but hold that section 56a of the act suffers, incurably, from the vice of unreasonable, irrational classification offending the principle of equality guaranteed under article 14 of the constitution. 117. there is, ..... used to express different and sometimes contradictory ideas , said the learned judge. or unreasonable. some or other constitutional infirmity must be found before invalidating an act. an enactment cannot be struck down on the ground that court thinks it unjustified. 87. rajbala emphatically enunciates that the courts in this country do .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
..... to be approved by the british board of film censors, was held to have surrendered its power to control and also the case of the police complaints board, which acted as if it were bound by a decision of the director of public prosecutions when only required to 'have regard' to it. this doctrine has even been applied to ..... one authority is in substance exercised by another. the proper authority may share its power with someone else, or may allow someone else to dictate to it by declining to act without their consent or by submitting to their wishes or instructions. the effect then is that the discretion conferred by parliament is exercised, at least in part, by the ..... filed the present writ petition.3. the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to sections 185 b, 236(3) and 276 of the kerala panchayat raj act, 1994, and has contended that the secretary of the grama panchayat is the primary authority to take a decision in terms of section 236 and that his mere repetition or .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
..... contra, the learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the records amply establish that the land stood converted much prior to the enforcement of the wetland act, 2008. in elaboration of his submissions, the learned counsel for the respondent has drawn my attention to exhibit p3 report issued by the village officer. though ..... said finding belies the contention of the respondent that the land stood converted long prior to the enforcement of the kerala conservation of paddy land and wetland act, 2008. he has also submitted that, apart from the issue of the nature of the land, what weighed with the petitioner grama panchayat was that ..... ext.r1(k) true copy of the relevant portions of the data bank maintained in the krishi bhavan, aruvikkara, obtained by the respondent under right to information act and further pertaining to the land in aruvikkara village /true copy/ p.s. to judge dama seshadri naidu, j.------------------------------------------------------ w.p.(c)nos.19676 & 19968 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
..... other authorities as its members.6. countering the objection of the respondent grama panchayat that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy under section 276 of the act, the learned senior counsel would contend that the order passed by the second respondent suffers from the vice of ultra vires or abdication. according to the ..... court gave an express direction to the second respondent to consider petitioner's exhibit p10 application in terms of section 232 of the kerala panchayat raj act, instead of deciding the issue independently after application of mind, the second respondent was simply swayed by the dictates of the sub-committee of the grama ..... .2014 issued by the2d respondent to the petitioner. p14: copy of the report of the sub committee of the1t respondent obtained the petitioner under the right to information act. respondent(s)' exhibits: nil /true copy/ p.a.to.judge sts c.r. dama seshadri naidu, j.--------------------------------------- w.p.(c) no. 34866 of 2014 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
..... that it is obligatory on the part of the petitioner to obtain a licence from the respondent grama panchayat in terms of section 232 of the kerala panchayat raj act (the 'act' for brevity), read with rule 3 of the kerala panchayat raj (issue of licence to dangerous and offensive trades and factories) rules, 1996 (the 'rules' ..... panchayat could not bring to my notice any notification having been issued by the respondent grama panchayat. variably expressed, section 232 only enables the grama panchayat to act on the notification of the government in terms of rule 3 of the rules regarding the dangerous and offensive trades, and then further notify within the limits of ..... sub- sections (2), (3) and (4) of section 232, the remaining provisions contained in sub-section (1) of the said section of the kerala panchayat raj act support the inclusion of abkari shops under the schedule to the rules. therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is plainly untenable. so, even though .....
Tag this Judgment!