Nominal Index [Citations 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 288- 303]Neethu v. Trijo Joseph, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 288T.K Pradeep v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 289XXX v. Union of India, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 290Suresh Raj v. National Investigation Agency, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 291Vijay Babu v. State of Kerala & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 292M/S C.S Company & Ors v....
Nominal Index [Citations 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 288- 303]
Neethu v. Trijo Joseph, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 288
T.K Pradeep v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 289
XXX v. Union of India, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 290
Suresh Raj v. National Investigation Agency, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 291
Vijay Babu v. State of Kerala & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 292
M/S C.S Company & Ors v. Kerala State Electricity Board & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 293
Subaida Ebrahim v. Moosa C & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 294
Arun P. v. State of Kerala & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 295
Jayachandran V. v. State of Kerala & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 296
Sister Sephy v CBI, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 297
Rakhi Bose & Anr. v Union of India & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 298
Furseen Majeed & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 299
Sujith Narayanan v. State of Kerala & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 300
Kerala Private Hospitals Association v. State of Kerala & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 301
Abdul Ansar v. State of Kerala, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 302
Southern Dredging Co (P) Ltd v. K. Muhammed Haji, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 303
Judgments/Orders This Week
Case Title: Neethu v. Trijo Joseph
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 288
It has been ruled that a Court can strike off the defence of the defaulter if they deliberately or willfully refuse to comply with its order directing payment of interim maintenance under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act). Justice Kauser Edappagath held so after observing that in Rajnesh v. Neha & Anr, the Supreme Court had upheld the power of the court to strike off the defence if there was willful and contumacious non-compliance with the order of payment of maintenance.
Case Title: T.K Pradeep v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 289
The High Court asked Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) to produce a foolproof mechanism it uses to schedule its trips after a plea complained of employees being forced to work more than eight hours. Justice Devan Ramachandran directed the KSRTC to revert back with proper instruction on the same before going into the merits of the case. The Court deemed it appropriate that KSRTC be given time to produce before it a foolproof mechanism for fixing the Schedules of their trips, which does not violate the statutory scheme either.
Case Title: XXX v. Union of India
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 290
The Court has directed the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade to consider compulsory licensing of Ribociclib, a life-saving breast cancer drug considering the alarming number of women who succumb to the disease merely because they could not afford treatment. Justice V.G. Arun found this issue to be demanding serious consideration at the hands of the concerned authorities and issued an interim direction to the Department to pass a reasoned order on this issue after consulting with the relevant authorities.
Case Title: Suresh Raj v. National Investigation Agency
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 291
The Court has held that under Sections 306 and 307 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), a pardon can be granted to any person even if they have not been arraigned as an accused in the final report, as long as they were privy to the offence. A Division Bench of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran opined so after observing that the language employed in Sections 306 and 307 is not 'an accused person' but 'any person', which implies that the person to whom pardon is to be tendered need only be 'directly or indirectly concerned in or privy to' the offence.
Case Title: Vijay Babu v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 292
The High Court granted pre-arrest bail subject to conditions to Malayalam actor-producer Vijay Babu's plea in the case where an actress accused him of sexually exploiting her. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas allowed the anticipatory bail plea with a condition that limited custody of the actor shall be available to the investigating officer.
Case Title: M/S C.S Company & Ors v. Kerala State Electricity Board & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 293
The Court has held that a suit instituted by or against a firm is a suit by or against all the partners of the firm and that the firm's name stands for all who were partners at the time when the cause of action arose. A Division Bench of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S. Sudha pointed out that the policy underlying Order XXX (Suits by or against firms and persons carrying on business in names other than their own) CPC, is to avoid a long array of parties and to allow a convenient mode of institution of suits by/against partners collectively, who carry on business under a particular name.
Case Title: Subaida Ebrahim v. Moosa C & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 294
The Court recently ruled that under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), when there is an order of rateable distribution for a property in favour of separate decree holders, one of them cannot claim to set-off their entire debt from the sale proceeds. A Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G Ajithkumar held that in a case where rateable distribution is ordered by the Court, the decree-holder only has the right to set off a proportionate amount he is entitled to.
Case Title: Arun P. v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 295
The Kerala High Court on Monday denied anticipatory bail to a man accused of obstructing a doctor from performing her official duty finding that under the Kerala Healthcare Service Persons and Healthcare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage to Property) Act, even an obstruction or hindrance committed on a healthcare person is a grave offence. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed that violence against a medical professional was a non-bailable offence and granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner would defeat the legislative mandate.
Case Title: Jayachandran V. v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 296
The Court has held that a delinquent's right to receive the enquiry report is considered an essential part of a reasonable opportunity to be extended to them and a refusal to furnish the report amounts to a denial of their right to defend themselves in the disciplinary proceedings. A Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P also held that even if such a right is not explicitly stated in the statute, being a fundamental and essential part of the natural justice, it must be read into every statute.
Case Title: Sister Sephy v CBI
Citation:2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 297
The Court allowed the applications filed by convicts Sister Sephy and Father Thomas Kottoor seeking suspension of the life sentence imposed on them in the sensational Sister Abhaya murder case. A Division Bench of Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran thereby granted bail to the convicts with the condition to execute bonds of Rs. 5 lakh each and two solvent sureties. If their conviction and sentence were upheld or even modified, the time during which they are so released was to be excluded in computing the term of their sentence as provided in Section 389(4) CrPC.
Case Title: Rakhi Bose & Anr. v Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 298
The Court ruled that the right of a frozen embryo to develop into a foetus and then be born cannot be obstructed by relying on provisions in the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021. Justice V.G Arun observed that the main objective of the Act was to prevent abuse of assisted reproductive procedures and not to pose hurdles in the way of aspiring parents.
12. In-Flight Protest Against Chief Minister: Kerala High Court Grants Bail To 2 Youth Congress Workers
Case Title: Furseen Majeed & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 299
The High Court granted bail to two Youth Congress workers, Furseen Majeed and R.K Naveen, who were arrested and remanded following their protest against Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on a flight at the Thiruvananthapuram airport. Justice Viju Abraham granted bail to the petitioners noting that considering the nature of the allegations, further custodial interrogation of the petitioners did not seem necessary.
13. In-Flight Protest Against Chief Minister: Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail To 3rd Accused
Case Title: Sujith Narayanan v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 300
The High Court granted pre-arrest bail to a Youth Congress worker Sujith Narayanan who has been accused of conspiring to protest against Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on a flight at the Thiruvananthapuram airport. Justice Viju Abraham granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner observing that while the first two accused allegedly involved in the incident were arrested, there was no attempt at all to arrest him.
Case Title: Kerala Private Hospitals Association v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 301
Stating that reports of attacks on healthcare persons have become a routine, the Kerala High Court on Thursday asked the State government to consider its suggestion of placing police presence in hospitals, at least in the most sensitive areas for now, which can later be extended to other places in due time. A Division Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Kauser Edappagath also said that while statutory provisions provide for stringent penalties, this does not seem to be a sufficient deterrent for the assailants.
Case Title: Abdul Ansar v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 302
The Court recently ruled that a conductor of a stage carriage bus, ringing its bell and signalling the driver to move forward when a passenger was boarding it thereby causing serious injury to the passenger is an act punishable under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 308 punishes the attempt to commit culpable homicide. Justice P.G. Ajithkumar held so after finding that the conductor has a statutory duty to ensure the safety of the passengers and that he would thereby have sufficient knowledge that his action of ringing the bell could have fatal consequences.
16. Plea Of Adjustment Should Be Raised Before Institution Of Suit: Kerala High Court Reiterates
Case Title: Southern Dredging Co (P) Ltd v. K. Muhammed Haji
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 303
The High Court has reiterated that a plea of adjustment can be pressed into service only if raised before the institution of the suit and not afterwards, unlike a plea for set-off. Justice A. Badharudeen also noted that leave for filing additional written statements is usually not granted by courts if they are filed after a long delay. The Judge added that to determine whether a plea raised in defence is a plea of set-off or of payment by adjustment it has to be ascertained as to whether a separate action could be maintained by the defendant on the basis of his claim.