Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 4 - March 10, 2024

Nominal Index [Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 152 – 164]Firos C.A. Versus State Of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 152 Johny Padikala V P C Hassan 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 153 Binoy Kodiyeri v. The Assistant Commissioner 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 154 Vaisakh v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 155Bipin Sunny v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 156Shameera S v Secretary To Government 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 157The Commissioner V Nithya R Warriar 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 158 T M Irshad v State of Kerala & Connected Case 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 159 Darsana v Sunil 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 160 Ashish AS v. Union of India and ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 161 Khalid v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 162 Greeshma Viji v. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kottayam 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 163 Jayakumar and ors. v. Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 164 Judgements/OrdersKerala VAT Act Empowers Taxing Authorities To Recover Tax Dues From Directors Of Private Company: Kerala High CourtCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 152Case Title: Firos C.A. Versus State Of KeralaThe Kerala High Court has held that Section 39 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, empowers the taxing authorities to recover the tax dues from the directors of the private company if the company fails to make payment of the tax.The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh has observed that when the taxing authorities could not recover the dues from the company, they issued notice for recovery of the said tax dues against the petitioners, who are the directors.The petitioners are the directors of M/s Absar Buildwares Private Limited, a company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act. The company failed to make payment of the dues under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003.Owner Of Premises Cannot Be Made Liable For Third Party Damages Due To Conduct Of Business Of Tenant: Kerala High CourtCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 153Case title: Johny Padikala V P C HassanJustice Sathish Ninan stated that the owner could at best be expected to oversee that the business was conducted by the tenant in accordance with the licence deed but could not be made liable for damages to a third party. “The owner of the premises could not be made liable for any damage that occurred to a third party consequent on the conduct of the business by the occupier of the premises-the second defendant. However, the position would have been different if the entrustment was for the conduct of a business which is not permitted under law.”The first defendant (owner) is the appellant who was the owner of a building containing shop rooms. He had let out his shop room to the second defendant (tenant) for storing explosive substances.Kerala High Court Directs Binoy Kodiyeri To File Income Tax Returns For Assessment Years 2015-22Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 154Case Title: Binoy Kodiyeri v. The Assistant CommissionerThe Kerala High Court has disposed of the petition filed by Binoy Kodiyeri challenging the assessment orders issued to him by the Income Tax Department for a total of 7 assessment years from 2015-16 to 2021-22. Binoy Kodiyeri, son of CPM politician Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, had moved a plea before the High Court alleging that the procedure adopted by the IT Department in issuing certain notices to him was illegal. He claimed the notices were issued in violation of Section 153C of the Income Tax Act which provides for the re-opening of assessments for only six preceding years.[NDPS Act] Must Follow Procedure For Drawing, Storing, Testing & Disposal Of Samples: Kerala HC Grants Bail For Procedural Lapse By Detecting OfficerCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 155Case title: Vaisakh v State of KeralaThe Kerala High Court has allowed the bail application of an accused whose crime was registered for allegedly possessing narcotics and psychotropic substances in commercial quantity.In the facts of the case, the police officer searched and seized contraband in from two different zip lock bags from the petitioner and pillion rider, and without drawing a representative sample from both the covers, the contraband was mixed and put in a single cover without the permission of a Magistrate.Justice C S Dias found that it was mandatory to follow the procedure laid down for drawal, storage, testing and disposal of samples seized as per Section 52 A (procedure for disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances) of the NDPS Act and Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (seizure, storage, sampling and disposal) Rules, 2022.Abuse Of Process: Kerala HC Dismisses Third Anticipatory Bail Application, Warns Of Costs & Directs Accused To SurrenderCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 156Case title: Bipin Sunny v State of KeralaThe Kerala High Court has warned the imposition of cost to a person who approached the Court for a third time with an anticipatory bail application on the same set of facts.Justice A Badharudeen stated that the petition was an abuse of the process of the Court and warned of imposition of cost.“Therefore, the present petition is absolutely an ...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 4 - March 10, 2024

Tellmy Jolly & Rubayya Tasneem

Tags