Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 701 - 719]Madathil Pakruti v. T.P. Kunjanandan and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 701Angels Nair v. Union of India and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 702Shahabeen Hameed v. Muhammed Ajnas A.B., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 703Sivadasan Nair K.G. v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 704Treasa K.J. v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 705S. Jayasree. v. State of...
Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 701 - 719]
Madathil Pakruti v. T.P. Kunjanandan and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 701
Angels Nair v. Union of India and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 702
Shahabeen Hameed v. Muhammed Ajnas A.B., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 703
Sivadasan Nair K.G. v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 704
Treasa K.J. v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 705
S. Jayasree. v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 706
Public Eye Trust Rep. By its General Secretary v State of Kerala & Ors. and connected case, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 707
XXX v. State, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 708
Anil K. Emmanuel v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 709
State of Kerala v. Sameer Navas and Connected Cases, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 710
Suo Motu v. The Government of Kerala and connected case, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 711
M/s Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 712
Varghese Kuruvila @ Sunny Kuruvilla v. Annie Varghese and Anr. , 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 713
M/S Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA) v. Commissioner of Income Tax, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 714
Midhun Mohan and Ors. v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 715
Bhavesh Anil Kumar v. The Assistant Labour Officer and Another, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 716
Jose v. Jose and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 717
T.K. Vasudevan Nair and Ors. v. T. Vrij Mohan and Ors. , 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 718
Abdul Hakkim v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 719
Judgments/ Orders This Week
Case Title: Madathil Pakruti v. T.P. Kunjanandan and Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 701
The Kerala High Court has held that when multiple documents on same property are challenged, the declaratory relief against a subsequent document is only ancillary to the challenge of an earlier instrument, and the court fee need to be computed only on the principal relief under Section 6 (1) of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959,
Justice P. Krishna Kumar, delivered the judgment while setting aside the Munsiff Court's direction that the plaintiff must amend the plaint and remit court fee based on the higher consideration reflected in a subsequent document.
Case Title: Angels Nair v. Union of India and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 702
The Kerala High Court recently refused to entertain a public interest litigation containing "wide-ranging prayers" for peaceful resolution of wildlife conflict in the State, among others.
The petitioner submitted before a division bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. that it was not possible to make amendments as suggested by the Court.
The Court, thereafter, said,
“We are not inclined to entertain the petition with such wide ranging prayers. Entertaining the petition with such prayers will not lead to any fruitful intervention".
Case Title: Shahabeen Hameed v. Muhammed Ajnas A.B.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 703
The Kerala High Court recently refused to entertain an Original Petition filed before it challenging a Family Court's order dismissing a restoration application. According to the Court, when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is provided under Order 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure, that has to be pursued.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Snehalatha M.B. noted that the Family Court had dismissed an application preferred under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC for restoring a suit that was dismissed for non-appearance.
Case Title: Sivadasan Nair K.G. v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 704
The Kerala High Court recently held that to satisfy the requirement of 'instigation' leading to the offence of abetment of suicide, the words of the accused need not be such as to compel the victim to commit suicide and it would be sufficient if the same is suggestive of the consequence.
Justice V.G. Arun was considering a plea to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner for commission of the offences under Sections 306 [Abetment to suicide] and 113 [Liability of abettor for an effect caused by the act abetted different from that intended by the abettor] of the Indian Penal Code.
Case Title: Treasa K.J. v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 705
The Kerala High Court has vacated its earlier judgment in the writ petition relating to the upkeep of Perandoor Canal, to direct the District Collector's Committee to oversee the City's Canal and Drainage system instead of the 'High Level Committee'.
Justice Devan Ramachandran, in his earlier judgment dated 27 August had directed the High Level Committee constituted by the Court to oversee the Canal and Drainage system.
Case Title: S. Jayasree. v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 706
The Kerala High Court on Monday refused to entertain the anticipatory bail plea of former secretary of the Travancore Devaswom Board and Thiruvabharanam Commissioner, who is booked in the Sabarimala gold theft case.
In view of the Supreme Court's observation in Mohammed Rasal C. v. State of Kerala, Justice K. Babu remarked that there were no exceptional circumstances justifying the petitioner to directly approach the High Court before going before the Sessions Court.
Case Title: Public Eye Trust Rep. By its General Secretary v State of Kerala & Ors. and connected case
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 707
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (4 November) closed a public interest litigation seeking increase in honorarium paid to Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHA workers).
The division bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M., closed the writ petition on being informed by the State Attorney that the monthly honorarium has been increased by Rs. 1000/- from November 1, 2025.
Case Title: XXX v. State
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 708
The Kerala High Court recently held that the first wife must be given an opportunity of hearing by the statutory authorities while registering the second marriage of a Muslim man in accordance with the Kerala Registration of Marriages (Common) Rules 2008.
Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan observed that even though the Muslim personal allows a second marriage to a man in certain situations, if the marriage is to be registered, the law of the land would prevail. Then, religion becomes secondary to constitutional rights.
Case Title: Anil K. Emmanuel v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 709
The Kerala High Court has recently held that a trial court may incorporate charges under both Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code when it is doubtful as to what offence has been committed.
Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath pronounced the decision while considering an original petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution. A journalist, who was a stranger to the proceeding before the trial court challenged the order dismissing a petition under Section 239(1) of the BNSS seeking addition of a charge.
Case Title: State of Kerala v. Sameer Navas and Connected Cases
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 710
The Kerala High Court has observed that when an allegation of demand of bribe by a Minister is raised, the same cannot be merited merely on the basis of oral statements and it would require thorough scrutiny.
Justice A. Badharudeen made the observation while dismissing three connected criminal revision petitions filed by the State of Kerala challenging the discharge of former Minister Adoor Prakash, his then private secretary V. Raju, and other officials accused in a vigilance case related to alleged irregularities in the grant of a wholesale ration depot licence.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. The Government of Kerala and connected case
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 711
The Kerala High Court has issued a comprehensive set of directions to ensure the effective implementation of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in Sampurana Behura v. Union of India [2018 (4) SCC 433].
The division bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Basant Balaji, issued the directions while delivering the judgment in two connected cases, one suo motu petition and a public interest petition filed by Bachpan Bachao Adolan, an NGO founded by Nobel Laureate Kailash Satyarthi and its programme director Sampurna Behura.
Case Title: M/s Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 712
The Kerala High Court stated that revisional power under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act cannot be invoked when Assessing Officer (AO) allowed deduction under Section 32AC after proper inquiry.
Justices A. Muhamed Mustaque and Harisankar V. Menon opined that merely for the reason that AO extended the deduction claimed after carrying out investigations, the exercise of the power under Section 263 of the Act is not required. At worst, the revisional authority can correct the error, if any, committed by the AO, by holding that the extension of the benefit of deduction was erroneous, with reference to the purchase of the assets during the previous years.
Case Title: Varghese Kuruvila @ Sunny Kuruvilla v. Annie Varghese and Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 713
The Kerala High Court recently clarified that the scheme of the provision under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure, corresponding Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita does not contemplate maintenance claim by a major daughter unless she is unable to maintain herself due to physical or mental abnormality or injury.
Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath also noted that unlike in the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act [HAMA] and the Muslim personal law, there is no provision in personal law applicable to Christians for maintaining an unmarried daughter who has attained majority.
Kerala High Court Quashes Income Tax Appellate Order Against AMMA, Directs Fresh Consideration
Case Title: M/S Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA) v. Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 714
The Kerala High Court has set aside an order passed by the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals), against the Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA), holding that the appellate authority failed to comply with the mandatory requirements under the Income Tax Act.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A., observed that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred by rejecting AMMA's appeal solely on the ground of non-appearance, without addressing the merits of the case as mandated under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Case Title: Midhun Mohan and Ors. v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 715
The Kerala High Court on Friday (November 7) quashed the abduction case initiated against actress Lakshmi Menon in view of the settlement entered into between the parties.
Justice C.S. Dias allowed the Crl.M.C. filed by all the four accused persons, including the actress, and quashed the FIR registered and all further proceedings in Crime No. 346 of 2025 of the Ernakulam Town North Police Station as against the petitioners.
Case Title: Bhavesh Anil Kumar v. The Assistant Labour Officer and Another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 716
The Kerala High Court has held that the Managing Director of a Company can be treated as an “employer” under Section 2 (e) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, for proceedings initiated under Section 20(2) of the Act.
Justice K. Babu, was delivering a judgment in a writ petition filed by the former Managing Director of Southwest Motorcorp India Pvt. Ltd., who challenged an order issued by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Kannur under Section 20(3) of the Minimum wages Act.
Case Title: Jose v. Jose and Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 717
The Kerala High Court, in a recent judgment, clarified that a person accused of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can refer to particular circumstances of the case in order to rebut the presumption under Section 139 and prove non-existence of debt or liability by preponderance of probabilities.
The appeal before Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas was preferred by the complainant in the case seeking to assail the acquittal of the accused in the case.
Case Title: T.K. Vasudevan Nair and Ors. v. T. Vrij Mohan and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 718
The Kerala High Court has clarified the limits of granting specific performance for part of a contract under Section 12(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, stating that a decree for part performance for a lesser extent should not be granted if the defendant holds the entire extent of the property.
The Division Bench of Justice Sathish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar delivered the judgment in an appeal filed against a decree for specific performance granted by the Sub Court, Koyilandy.
Case Title: Abdul Hakkim v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 719
The Kerala High Court recently acquitted a person, who was found guilty of the offence under Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code [Possession of forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes], for possessing a counterfeit 100 Dollar bill.
Justice Johnson John relied on the 2005 decision of the Supreme Court in K. Hasim v. State of T.N. to find that the offence under the provision is not restricted to the possession of Indian currency but applied to American dollar bills also.
Other Important Developments This Week
NH-544: Kerala High Court Directs NHAI To Address Road Safety Issues Pointed By Interim Panel
Case Title: Shaji J. Kodankadath v. Union of India and connected cases
Case No: WP(C) 20253/2021 and connected cases
The Kerala High Court on Monday (03 November) directed the National Highway Authority of India to ensure that the road safety issues, pointed out by the Interim Committee constituted by it, are addressed in a time bound manner and to report compliance to the Committee within two weeks.
The division bench comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Harisankar V. Menon gave the direction while considering the writ petition regarding traffic congestion on NH-544.
Case Title: Hiran Das Murali v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: Crl.M.App. No. 5 of 2025 in Bail Appl. 9377/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Monday (November 3) modified the condition imposed on Rapper Vedan while granting him anticipatory bail in a case alleging rape on the false promise to marry, thereby permitting him to travel abroad and perform at international concerts.
Vedan argued that he has been invited for various concerts in different countries on different dates as a professional singer, and the condition restricting him from leaving India will affect him prejudicially.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas substituted the condition (f) with a new condition: "The applicant shall, one week before undertaking any travel outside India, intimate his travel details to the Investigating Officer along with the itinerary and place of stay and file an affidavit giving the details of his passport and his contact number outside the country as and when he travels.”
Case Title: Juby Thomas and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) No. 37251/2025
While hearing the objections to Shane-Nigam starrer movie 'Haal' on Monday (October 3), the Kerala High Court asked what exactly was meant by the expression 'Love Jihad'.
Justice V.G. Arun orally asked, “What exactly is meant by the expression 'Love Jihad'? Why is it called 'Jihad' when it comes to one particular (religion)...”
Case Title: Sreedhanya Construction Company v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. and other cases
Case No: WP(C) 39722/2025 and other cases
The Kerala High Court on Monday (November 3) stayed the income tax proceedings in a batch of writ petitions, which had alleged that the notices issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax to be defective for being violative of the format prescribed in Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) Circular No. F. No. 225/157/2017/ITA-II dated 23-06-2017.
As an interim prayer, the petitioner has prayed for the stay of operation of proceedings initiated pursuant to the notice.
Allowing the interim prayer, Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. gave time to the standing counsel for the respondents to take instructions in the matter and posted the case to November 18.
Case Title: Santon Lama v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP (Crl) No. 1421/2025
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (November 5) asked the special investigation team (SIT) investigating the case of Suraj Lama–stated to be missing since October 5 after he arrived in Kochi from Kuwait–to consider the suggestions given by his son Santon Lama.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha allowed an interim application in the habeas corpus plea filed by Santon Lama for accepting the photograph of his father as an additional document.
In a detailed representation to the Secretary of the Kerala High Court Advocates Association (KHCAA), an advocate has called for the creation of a comprehensive and confidential mental health support system for members of the legal fraternity, following recent tragic deaths of advocates linked to mental health distress.
In his letter dated November 5, 2025, Advocate Chelson Chembarathy highlighted that the legal profession imposes severe psychological strain on practitioners, citing studies that show lawyers experience depression at rates 28% higher than the general population, with 23% reporting chronic stress and 19% facing anxiety. He described the situation as a “mental health crisis affecting legal professionals,” urging that it can no longer be ignored.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) 40608/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (November 03) directed the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to conduct a scientific probe into the alleged misappropriation of gold during the repair and re-plating of sacred artefacts belonging to the Sabarimala Sreekovil, including the dwarapalaka idols, peedams, and doors.
The division bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar observed that the entire chain of events points to systematic and deliberate misappropriation of temple assets executed under the guise of renovation and restoration.
Case Title: Periyar Malineekarana Virudha Samithi v State of Kerala and connected matters
Case No: WP(C) 996/ 2012 and connected matters
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (05 November) directed the State Government, and Kerala State Pollution Control Board to expedite steps to set up the Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) for remediation of Periyar River.
The division bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M B Snehalatha was hearing a batch of petitions concerning pollution in the river, particularly Kuzhikandam thodu- its tributary.
Case Title: G. Samuel & Ors. v. State of Kerala (Deleted) & Ors.
Case No: WP (PIL) 74/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (November 5) directed the Additional Chief Secretary of the Health and Family Welfare Department to file an affidavit stating how the State Government is proposing to address the shortfalls pointed by the State Council for Clinical Establishment with respect to public hospitals in the State.
The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. was considering a public interest litigation seeking safety standards at public medical facilities, following the collapse of the Kottayam Medical College building.
Case Title: Indian Association Of Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation (IAPMR) v. Union of India and Ors.
Case No: W.P.(C) No.41064 of 2025
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (November 4) passed an order against the usage of "Dr." prefix by physiotherapists and occupational therapists who do not possess recognised medical qualification.
Justice V.G. Arun was told that there is a conflict between the provisions of the Indian Medical Degrees Act, 1916 (Exhibit P1) and the clauses in the Competency Based Curriculum for Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy [Exihibit P1(a)].
Case Title: Esai Clara v. State of Kerala
Case No: WP(C) 30999/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Thursday (November 6) was informed that the Bar Council of India has granted interim approval to add two supernumerary seats under Transgender category in all law colleges in Kerala.
Justice V.G. Arun was considering a writ petition seeking reservation under the 'Transgender category' for admissions to integrated Five year LL.B courses in Government Law Colleges.
Case Title: Venugopalan C. v. The Tahsildar and Ors.
Case No: W.A. No. 2448 of 2025
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (November 5) orally observed that the law should be amended so that the land owner is saddled with liability in cases of illegal conversion of paddy lands.
The Division Bench consisting of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Harisankar V. Menon was considering a writ appeal preferred by the owner of a JCB excavator seeking to get interim custody over his vehicle, which was rented to a landowner to dig a wastewater pit. After hearing the parties, the Court reserved its verdict.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. Union Government
Case No: SSCR 29/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Friday (November 7) directed the Travancore Devaswom Board to initiate steps to ensure that the selling of chemical kumkum is banned in Sabarimala to avoid substantial environmental degradation.
The Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan and Justice K.V. Jayakumar was considering a suo motu petition based on a report filed by the Special Commissioner, detailing the measures required to provide adequate facilities for Sabarimala pilgrims at the Edathavalams (resting places) during the Mandalam–Makaravilakku Festival Season 2025–2026.
Case Title: Juby Thomas and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) No. 37251/2025
The Kerala High Court on Friday (November 7) reserved its verdict on a plea preferred by the producer and the director of the Malayalam film 'Haal' that had challenged the 'A' certification granted by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) as well as the excision suggested by the Board.
After a detailed hearing yesterday, Justice V.G. Arun orally said that the judgment in the case would be pronounced next week, on Friday (November 14).
Case Title: Paristhithi Samrakshana Samiithi Muthalakodam v. State of Kerala and Ors. and connected cases
Case No: WP(C) 39694/ 2018 and connected cases
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (November 5) directed the State Government to file a detailed affidavit clarifying its stand on the legality of paddy land reclamations made prior to the enforcement of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. issued the direction while hearing a batch of writ petitions, individual landowners and public interest groups challenging the validity of the 2018 Amendment of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008.