LiveLaw Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 27 to August 2, 2026

Citations: 2026 : LiveLaw (Ker) 397 - 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 418Nominal IndexP. v. R, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 397Mahesh B. @ Mahesh Panju and Anr. v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 398V v. P and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 399Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 400P. Gopinathan v. Union of India, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 401Inspector General of Registration and Anr. v Muhammed and connected matter, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 402Santhosh v. E.A. Sainaba and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 403Shresha N. and Ors. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 404Ismail C. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 405A v. B., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 406Muhashib v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 407Naman Ajay v. Union of India and Ors. and Karthika Sivaji v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 408Asha S.S. and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 409Mubina Muhamed K.M and Ors. v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 410Anju Mary Francis v. Kerala Public Service Commission and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 411Anil Kumar P.R v. State of Kerala and Ors, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 412The Eruvessy Grama Panchayath v Tankappan, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 413Dipin Edavana v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 414Mar Joseph Pamplany v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 415Joshy K.J. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 416X v. The State Medical Officer and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 417Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 418Judgments/ Orders This WeekMarried Life Must Be Reviewed As A Whole; Few Isolated Incidents Over The Years Don't Constitute Mental Cruelty: Kerala High CourtCase Title: P. v. RCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 397The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, observed that married life must be reviewed as a whole and that a few instances would not amount to cruelty. The Division Bench of Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K. made the observation while dismissing a matrimonial appeal preferred by a husband challenging the dismissal of his divorce petition.Persons From Diverse Fields Can Judge Television Awards, 'Visual Arts' Can't Be Construed Narrowly: Kerala High CourtCase Title: Mahesh B. @ Mahesh Panju and Anr. v State of Kerala and Ors.Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 398The Kerala High Court has held that the expression "persons distinguished in the field of visual arts" under the Regulations governing the Kerala State Television Awards, 2022, must receive a broad, contextual interpretation and cannot be confined to its dictionary meaning, observing that the Government must have flexibility in constituting award juries. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas made the observation while delivering the judgment in writ challenging the Kerala State Television Awards, 2022.Husband's Failure To Pay Maintenance Is Economic Abuse Constituting Domestic Violence: Kerala High CourtCase Title: V v. P and Anr.Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 399The Kerala High Court has held that a husband's failure to pay maintenance to his wife and child constitutes economic abuse amounting to domestic violence under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.Justice Jobin Sebastian made the observation while dismissing a criminal revision petition filed by a husband challenging concurrent orders directing him to pay maintenance to his wife and minor daughter under Act.'Grossly Unholy Practice In A Holy Place': Kerala High Court Backs TDB Decision To End Officers Acting As Suppliers In SabarimalaCase Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Ors.Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 400The Kerala High Court recently closed suo motu proceedings concerning the procurement of pooja materials for Sabarimala rituals after the Travancore Devaswom Board's (TDB) decision to end the long-standing practice of Administrative Officers procuring Vazhipadu (offerings) materials. Calling the arrangement a "grossly unholy practice in a holy place", the Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar directed the Board to implement similar procurement reforms across all temples under its administration.Kerala High Court Upholds Law That Limits Interest On Delayed Gratuity To Gratuity AmountCase Title: P. Gopinathan v. Union of IndiaCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 401The Kerala High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the second proviso to Section 8 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, holding that the statutory cap restricting recoverable interest on delayed gratuity to the amount of gratuity itself is a matter of legislative policy and does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution. Justice Gopinath P. was considering a writ petition filed by a retired employee challenging the provision after he was denied a portion of the interest recovered from his employer through revenue recovery proceedings.Power Of Attorney Executed Abroad Must Be Registered Before It Can Be Used To Sell Property In India: Kerala High CourtCase Title: Inspector General of Registration and Anr. v ...

LiveLaw Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 27 to August 2, 2026

K. Salma Jennath

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

K. Salma Jennath

LiveLaw Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 27 to August 2, 2026

K. Salma Jennath

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

K. Salma Jennath

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers