Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 26 – June 1, 2025

Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 294 - 304]J.C. Flowers Asset Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd v. State of Kerala and others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 294Sukanth Suresh P. v State of Kerala and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 295Mathew B. Kurian v. National Council for Teacher Education and others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 296Sumisha (Minor) v Shaji P. Y. and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 297X v. FACT and others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 298Sheeba M.R. v. Kerala Veterinary and Animal Sciences University and Connected Cases, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 299Puthiya Purayil Shaji v State of Kerala and Another, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 300Adarsh E. v The Registrar and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 301M/S. National Collateral Management Service Ltd. and another v. Valiyaparambil Traders, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 302Dr. Ciza Thomas v State of Kerala and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 303Akhil Raj v State of Kerala and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 304Judgments/ Orders This WeekNo Omnibus Exception U/S 8F Of Indian Stamp Act Read With S.5 Of SARFAESI Act For Registration Of Asset Reconstruction Agreements: Kerala HCCase Title: J.C. Flowers Asset Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd v. State of Kerala and othersCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 294The Kerala High Court recently held that there is no omnibus or complete exemption on stamp duty provided under S. 8F of the Indian Stamp Act, read with S.5 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) for asset reconstruction agreements.The Court looked into the Amendment Act that brought in S. 5(1A) of SARFAESI Act and added S.8F to the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. It rejected the contention of the petitioners that no stamp duty is applicable as per the non obstante clause in S.8F. Justice T. R. Ravi went on to apply the golden rule of interpretation along the Supreme Court's rulings on the subject of interpretation of non obstante clauses to find that there is no complete exemption from levy of stamp duty.Kerala High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Intelligence Officer Accused Of Abetting Girlfriend's SuicideCase Title: Sukanth Suresh P. v State of Kerala and OthersCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 295The Kerala High Court on Monday (May 26) denied anticipatory bail to Sukanth Suresh, an intelligence officer allegedly involved in the suicide of his girlfriend/colleague.Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas noted that the investigation has revealed that the officer had relationships with other women. Further, it was also found out that the deceased got pregnant from the petitioner and she had undergone abortion. The Court also took into account the fact that the deceased used to transfer her salary to the petitioner every month.Kerala High Court Allows Lawyer's Plea Against NCTE For Payment Of Pending Legal Fees, Imposes ₹50K CostCase Title: Mathew B. Kurian v. National Council for Teacher Education and othersCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 296The Kerala High Court recently allowed a writ petition filed by an advocate against the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) seeking payment of over Rs 12 Lakh unpaid legal fees, imposing a cost of Rs 50,000 on NCTE finding its conduct "blameworthy". Rejecting NCTE's argument that a writ petition for payment of legal fees is not maintainable, Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. clarified that the maintainability of the writ petition for "unpaid professional fees" is not barred unless there are complex factual issues that prevent adjudication. It was further found that there is no legal backing or court ruling to state that such a petition cannot be admitted merely on the ground that it cannot be decided without determining the disputed question of fact.Kerala High Court Awards ₹53 Lakh To Woman Disabled After Road Accident As A Minor, Fixes Notional Income More Than Claimed By CounselCase Title: Sumisha (Minor) v Shaji P. Y. and OthersCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 297While considering a plea involving a woman, who as a minor in 2006 suffered serious injuries and was rendered disabled in a road accident, the Kerala High Court enhanced the compensation awarded to her by increasing the notional income for assessing loss of disability after taking into account the girl's severe condition.The DLSA Secretary's report stated that since the woman cannot do anything of her own, she always needs someone's help, for all her daily necessities. Justice C. Pratheep Kumar further observed that just because the girl's counsel before the tribunal canvassed for fixing the notional income of the petitioner at Rs.3000, does not mean that the insurer can be permitted to take advantage of this suggestion.Denial Of Public Employment To Person Based On Hepatitis-B Infection Illegal, Violative Of Article 14: Kerala High CourtCase Title: X v. FACT and othersCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 298The Kerala High Court recently held that denial of public employment to a person who is afflicted with Hepatitis B is illegal, unfair, unjustifiable and is violative of the Right to...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 26 – June 1, 2025

Manju Elsa Isac

Tags