Nominal Index [Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 252 - 269]Star Health And Allied Insurance Company Limited v. Balakrishnan K.M. and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 252A.K. Baby v State of Kerala and Ors. and connected case, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 253C.A. Jaleel v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 254Rajesh. K v The Additional District Magistrate and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 255Laiju M S v...
Nominal Index [Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 252 - 269]
Star Health And Allied Insurance Company Limited v. Balakrishnan K.M. and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 252
A.K. Baby v State of Kerala and Ors. and connected case, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 253
C.A. Jaleel v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 254
Rajesh. K v The Additional District Magistrate and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 255
Laiju M S v The District Collector and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 256
Vijayan P. v. George and Company and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 257
Lifin Sebastian and Anr. v. The District Collector and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 258
Shamseera Parambath v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 259
Alkarsf Apparels Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 260
Nevil John v. Kerala Water Authority and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 261
N. Rajendran v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 262
Harikumar K.K. v. State Election Commission and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 263
Varkey Varghese v Kathreena, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 264
Raveendra Panicker v. District Collector and Ors. and connected cases, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 265
Eriyad Palli @ Eriyad Mahallu Jama-Ath and Ors. v. Aboobacker K.M. and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 266
Vishnu @ Unni v State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 267
Hari Devageeth v. Union of India, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 268
Sabu K.S. v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 269
Judgments/ Orders This Week
Case Title: Star Health And Allied Insurance Company Limited v. Balakrishnan K.M. and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 252
In a recent judgment, the Kerala High Court refused to set aside a Lok Adalat order that directed an insurance company to pay compensation to a toddy tapper, who was injured in a fall from a coconut tree, even though the order recorded non-submission of insurance claim.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. remarked that writ courts can refuse to interfere with orders with technical discrepancies, if the writ sought to be enforced would affect another person's right to life.
Case Title: A.K. Baby v State of Kerala and Ors. and connected case
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 253
The Kerala High Court has reaffirmed that managers of aided schools do not have the authority to disregard the findings of a statutory enquiry officer who exonerates a teacher and thereafter impose a major penalty on their own.
Justice Viju Abraham delivered the judgment while considering a writ petition filed by the manager of an aided school challenging a government order granting service and salary benefits to a retired teacher who had earlier been compulsorily retired from service.
Case Title: C.A. Jaleel v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 254
The Kerala High Court recently passed a judgment whereby it set aside an order passed by the Chairperson of the District Disaster Management Authority that called upon the Secretary of the Panchayat concerned to demolish a dilapidated building.
Justice C. Jayachandran passed the judgment in a petition by a tenant of the building that was under the ownership of the Panchayat.
Case Title: Rajesh. K v The Additional DIstrict Magistrate and Ors.
Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 255
The Kerala High Court has held that Indian Roads Congress (IRC) guidelines cannot be treated as mandatory while considering applications for No Objection Certificates (NOCs) for petroleum retail outlets under the Petroleum Rules, 2002.
Justice M.A. Abdul Hakhim delivered the judgment in a writ by a dealer of Petroleum Retail outlet.
Case Title: Laiju M S v The District Collector and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 256
The Kerala High Court has held that a person conducting business on government puramboke land under a valid municipal licence cannot be treated as an “encroacher” for the purpose of denying rehabilitation and resettlement compensation when displaced by a public infrastructure project.
Justice Viju Abraham was delivering the judgment in a writ petition challenging a government order that stated that the petitioner, who owned a bunk shop in a puramboke area with statutory licence is not entitled to the compensation payable to tenants under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (2013 Act).
Case Title: Vijayan P. v. George and Company and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 257
The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, has clarified that joint trial of dishonour of multiple cheques is permissible when the cheques in question were issued as part of same transaction.
Justice Johnson John was considering a criminal revision petition filed by the accused in a cheque bounce case challenging the concurrent findings of guilt passed by the trial court and the appellate court.
Case Title: Lifin Sebastian and Anr. v. The District Collector and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 258
The Kerala High Court recently granted relief to two persons, who wanted to erect a gate on a government property that lied in between their property and the main road, by asking them to approach the Tahsildar concerned with an application as per the Kerala Land Conservancy Act and Rules.
Justice Viju Abraham ruled that a Tahsildar is empowered to grant permit for erecting wall, fence, building, etc. on government property following procedures and conditions in accordance with the Act and Rules.
Case Title: Shamseera Parambath v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 259
In a recent decision, the Kerala High Court held that a contractual employee working under the MGNREG Scheme can be removed only in accordance with the procedure laid down by the guidelines issued by the government.
Justice A. Badharudeen observed that the employee cannot be removed merely on the basis of a recommendation made by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB).
Case Title: Alkarsf Apparels Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 260
The Kerala High Court has held that the provisional attachment under the Banning of Unregulated Deposit (BUDS) Act cannot continue indefinitely and the attachment won't exist beyond the statutory period within which by the Competent Authority is mandated to file a confirmation application before the Designated Court as per Section 14.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas delivered the judgment.
Case Title: Nevil John v. Kerala Water Authority and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 261
The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, observed that possibility of misuse cannot be a reason to interpret a statutory provision contrary to what is explicitly provided.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas was considering a writ petition where the main issue was as to the meaning of the term 'multi stories building' provided under Section 2(xva) of the Kerala Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1986.
Case Title: N. Rajendran v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 262
In a recent ruling, the Kerala High Court has clarified that the Disaster Management Authority is bound to pay rent for all rooms in the building that was taken over by it irrespective of whether or not all the rooms were in its occupation.
Justice Viju Abraham was considering a plea challenging the award passed by the Arbitrator under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation granted to the petitioner in respect of his building requisitioned for institutional quarantine/COVID containment.
Case Title: Harikumar K.K. v. State Election Commission and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 263
Recently, the Kerala High Court held that as per Article 243K of the Constitution, the State Election Commission does not have any power to interfere once the election process to the panchayat is over and therefore, it cannot pass an order cancelling election result.
Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan was considering a plea by the Vice-President electee of Kottungal Grama Panchayat who had contested the election to the panchayat as a candidate of the BJP.
Settlement Deed Clause Divesting Daughter Of Property Upon Marriage Is Void: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Varkey Varghese v Kathreena
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 264
The Kerala High Court has held that a clause in a settlement deed providing that a daughter would lose her rights over gifted property if she married is void as being contrary to law and public policy.
Justice Easwaran S. delivered the judgment in a regular second appeal.
Case Title: Raveendra Panicker v. District Collector and Ors. and connected cases
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 265
The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, held that the provisions of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act cannot be invoked to evict alleged encroachers of private temples, which are not coming under the control of the Devaswom Board.
The Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar dismissed a batch of writ petitions that prayed for a direction to the State to remove private persons, who had alleged encroached upon the properties of private temples.
Case Title: Eriyad Palli @ Eriyad Mahallu Jama-Ath and Ors. v. Aboobacker K.M. and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 266
The Kerala High Court recently clarified that once a Waqf Tribunal is established by the State, a Muttawalli interest in a waqf or any person aggrieved by an order made under the Waqf Act must approach the Tribunal instead of the High Court.
The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. added that writ jurisdiction of High Court can be invoked only in cases where there is no Tribunal established or the Tribunal is not functioning.
Case Title: Vishnu @ Unni v State of Kerala
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 267
The Kerala High Court recently upheld a man's conviction under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, despite non-seizure of the mobile phone used to show sexually explicit videos to child, noting that no challenge has been raised regarding the non-seizure, during cross-examination.
Justice A. Badharudeen delivered the judgment in an appeal challenging conviction under Sections 4, 6, 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act, including a charge under Section 11(iii) relating to showing pornographic material to a child.
Kerala High Court Allows Transgender Man To Preserve His Eggs
Case Title: Hari Devageeth v. Union of India
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 268
The Kerala High Court on Friday (May 15) allowed a transgender man to cryopreserve his eggs by permitting him to approach an ART bank of his choice.
Justice Sobha Annamma Eapen pronounced the order.
Case Title: Sabu K.S. v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 269
The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, held that a person seeking to transfer a case from one Special Court to another Special Court can directly approach the High Court without first approaching the Sessions Court.
Justice A. Badharudeen delivered the judgment.
Other Important Developments This Week
Case Title: K.A. Muhammed Ashraf and Anr. v. Muslim Girls' Higher Secondary School and Ors.
Case No: IA No.1/2026 in WA No. 1029 of 2026 (Filing No.)
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (May 12) refused to stay a judgment that directed the Secretary of Erattupetta Municipality to grant approval for introducing co-education scheme in Muslim Girls' Higher Secondary School, Erattupetta— a girls-only school.
The Vacation Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen and Justice Muralee Krishna S. was considering a leave petition to file writ appeal preferred by two persons including one K.A. Muhammed Ashraf, who has also filed another writ petition (W.P.(C) No. 13677 of 2026) assailing the introduction of co-education in the school.
Mahindra Thar Roxx Owner Moves Kerala High Court Seeking Law To Regulate Vehicle Sales & Services
Case Title: TGN Kumar v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(PIL) 100/2026
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (May 12) issued notice to Chairman & Managing Director of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. and to the Chief Executive Officer of Valayat Mahindra Service Centre (Maradu) in a public interest litigation filed by a Mahindra Thar Roxx owner seeking enactment of a proposed 'Kerala Motor Vehicles Sales and Services Regulation' Act and Rules.
The Vacation Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen and Justice Muralee Krishna S., issued the notice.