Kerala High Court Monthly Digest - April 2023 [Citations 167-208]

Nominal Index Citations [2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 167-208]Niyas V The District Collector Palakkad, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 167Sukumaran v. R.C. Ibrahim & Ors., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 168Suni @ Sunil V State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 169Priyesh B Kartha V. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 170Dr. P K Asokan V State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 171Asif Azad v. Union of India & Ors.,2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 172All India Digital Cable Federation & Anr. v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India & Anr., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 173Noushad A. v. State of Kerala & Ors. and Nazeer A. v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 174Anand Mahadevan V State Of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 175State of Kerala V Shefy Joseph, 2023 (Ker) LiveLaw 176In Re Bruno v. Union of India & Ors., 2023 (Ker) LiveLaw 177Suo Motu V The Secretary To Government 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 178XXX v. YYY 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 179Sumesh U. & Anr. v. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad & Ors. and Saresh Sanker & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 180XXX v XXX 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 181Google Inc. v. XXXX & Ors. and other connected matters 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 182Surendra Babu v. State of Kerala & Ors. and Vellappally Natesan v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 183Dr. Naveen Prakash Nautiyal V Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 184Aji Krishnan V Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 185K Babu V Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 186Saheer S V Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 187State of Kerala v. Sreeram Venkitaraman and Wafa Najim @ Wafa Firoz v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 188Sebin Thomas v. Union of India & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 189M. Sivasankar v. Union of India & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 190K M Shaji V State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 191Chaithanya V Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 192Pannyan Raveendran v. Shamnad A. & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 193Thomas J Unniyadan v R Bindu 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 194XXX & Anr. v. YYY 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 195The Trivandrum Chamber of Commerce and Industry & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 196Bosco Louis V State of Kerala, Pauly Vadakkan v. Lulu International Shopping Mall Pvt Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 197Anu Mathew V State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 198Xavier T.J v State Of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 199XXX & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 200XXX V State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 201Dr. Shyly S. Raju v. State of Kerala & Ors.,2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 202M/S. Nileshwar Rangekallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham Versus The Commissioner Of Income Tax, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 203Dhisha v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 204Nishad H. v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 205Jijendran C.M. v. State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 206Indo-Asian News Channel Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 207Fasil V State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 208Judgments/Order This MonthTwo Authorities Empowered To Redress Same Grievance Via Two Different Procedures: Kerala High Court Points Lacuna In 2008 Wetland Conservation RulesCase Title: Niyas V The District Collector PalakkadCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 167The Kerala High Court recently observed that in the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008, where two authorities, the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) and the Local Level Monitoring Committee (LLMC) have been given the power to redress the same grievance, i.e., removal of a property erroneously included in the data bank as paddy land, the procedure laid out for both authorities are different.Pointing to this "lacuna" in the 2008 Rules, the court noted that while the LLMC is required to conduct a local inspection, it is not mandatory for the RDO to do so, even though the RDO has no specialized mechanism to ascertain the characteristic the land.A single bench of Justice Viju Abraham held that to address this issue, the RDO is to follow the same procedure prescribed to be followed by the LLMC under the Act.S.163A MV Act | Accident Can Be Said To Have Arisen 'Out Of Use Of Vehicle' That Was Stationary: Kerala High CourtCase Title: Sukumaran v. R.C. Ibrahim & Ors.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 168The Kerala High Court recently held that an accident could be said to have arisen 'out of the use of' a vehicle that had been stationary at the relevant time, in order to prove a claim under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter, 'MV Act, 1988').Although the Single Judge Bench of Justice Sophy Thomas dismissed the appeal against the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda, finding that the appellant does not fall within the ambit of the low income group under Section 163A of the MV Act with maximum annual income up to Rs.40,000/- , the Court relied upon precedents to observe that under the said provision, the appellant would not have to plead or establish any wrongful act or negligence or default of the owner of the vehicle or any other person.Cognizance Taken By Police For Offence U/S ...

Kerala High Court Monthly Digest - April 2023 [Citations 167-208]

Sheryl Sebastian

Tags