Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 703-718]Jeevan Ramesh v. Mahatma Gandhi University 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 703T.O.Souriyar v. Muttom Abdulla Kanjirathinkal House 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 704Athul Sundar v. Bar Council of India 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 705Satheesh Kumar S. v. Transport Commissioner 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 706Kiran Kurian Mathew v. Ashly Mathew & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker)...
Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 703-718]
Jeevan Ramesh v. Mahatma Gandhi University 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 703
T.O.Souriyar v. Muttom Abdulla Kanjirathinkal House 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 704
Athul Sundar v. Bar Council of India 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 705
Satheesh Kumar S. v. Transport Commissioner 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 706
Kiran Kurian Mathew v. Ashly Mathew & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 707
Vishnu Sajanan v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 708
XXXXX v. Union Of India 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 709
Pinchu Chandran v Arya J 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 710
Suo Moto High Court of Kerala v. State of Kerala and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 711
Baiju v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 712
XXX v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 713
Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) v. Director, Directorate of Enforcement and connected matter 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 714
Adarsh Thinkal T.S v. State of Kerala and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 715
Suo Moto v. State of Kerala and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 716
Jagadesh Ramachandran v. The Maintenance Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 717
Artech Realtors Versus Intelligence Officer 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 718
Orders/Judgments This Week
Case Title: Jeevan Ramesh v. Mahatma Gandhi University
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 703
The Kerala High Court recently set aside a show cause notice issued to a final year LLB student of MG University for being named as an accused in an NDPS Case.
The student who was suspended when an FIR had been lodged against him in the aforesaid case, was asked to show cause as to why a compulsory transfer certificate should not be issued to him.
In allowing the student's plea for setting aside the impugned show cause notice, Justice T.R. Ravi observed that the impugned notice would show that the college had already concluded that the student was guilty of possession and sale of narcotic drugs when the trial was not even completed.
Case Title: T.O.Souriyar v Muttom Abdulla Kanjirathinkal House
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 704
The Kerala High Court has held that a person commits the offence of cheating under Sections 415, 417 and 420 IPC when he issues a cheque to another person for discharging his pecuniary liabilities after the closure of his bank account.
The Court noted that issuance of the cheque with the knowledge that it would be dishonoured would show the presence of mens rea, that is, fraudulent or dishonest intention of the drawer to deceive the payee.
In allowing the present revision petition Justice G. Girish quashed the order of the appellate court exonerating the accused, and observed:
“It seems from the judgment of the appellate court that the learned Additional Sessions Judge was carried away by the impression that if a person issues a cheque after the closure of his account, in respect of an antecedent liability, and the said cheque happens to be dishonoured due to that reason, the above act of that person will not come within the purview of cheating as defined under Section 415 I.P.C. The above conclusion of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, in my view, is patently wrong.”
Case Title: Athul Sundar v Bar Council of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 705
The Kerala High Court refused to issue a direction to postpone the 18th All India Bar Examination, 2024 (AIBE) or All India Law Entrance Test, 2024 (AILET).
Justice T.R. Ravi observed that it cannot direct the authorities to postpone the examination at the instance of one candidate who wishes to attend both examinations.
“The Court cannot direct the examinations to be postponed at the instance of one of the candidates who wishes to take the examinations. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent submitted that the candidate can take another chance for the All India Bar examination and the fee paid will be adjusted towards that chance.”
Case Title: Satheesh Kumar S. v Transport Commissioner
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 706
The Kerala High Court has made it clear that vehicles registered as good carriage vehicles, but fitted with construction equipment and used for construction purposes can be levied with the motor vehicle tax applicable to construction equipment vehicles.
“It is further the definition as provided under clause 10(iii) of the schedule enumerated any other equipment vehicle which is exclusively used for construction purposes is to be considered as construction equipment liable for the purposes of levy of the tax for such vehicles. Considering the use of the petitioner's vehicles only for the construction purposes, I am of the view that petitioner's vehicles are liable to be taxed at the rate prescribed for construction equipment vehicles and not for the goods carriage vehicles.”, Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh observed.
Case Title: Kiran Kurian Mathew v. Ashly Mathew & Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 707
The Kerala High Court recently laid down that when a dispute arises on the correctness of valuation and Court fees to be paid, it ought to be determined after permitting evidence on the same, before the commencement of trial on merits, due to it being a mixed question of fact and law.
In the present case, a challenge had been raised regarding the correctness of the valuation and Court fees paid. The Sub-Court concluded that since the issue involved a mixed question of law and fact, it could only be determined after trial, and issued an order in that regard, which had been challenged before the High Court.
"If the Sub Court is of the opinion that the question of valuation and court fee is a mixed question of fact and law, possibly evidence may be permitted on that question and a decision taken accordingly, before commencement of the trial on the merits of the matter, as clarified by the explanation to Section 12," the Single Bench of Justice C. Jayachandran observed while setting aside the order.
Case Title: Vishnu Sajanan v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 708
The Kerala High Court held that arbitrary or stringent conditions imposed on an accused when he was released on default bail under Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) was violative of his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The bail application of the accused was allowed by the Sessions Court as the investigation was not completed even after sixty days of judicial custody. The Sessions Court whilst allowing the bail application under Section 167 (2) CrPC imposed stringent conditions which were challenged before the High Court.
Justice PV Kunhikrishnan, while lifting the stringent bail conditions imposed upon the accused observed that default bail was a statutory right that cannot be curtailed by imposition of onerous conditions.
“While imposing conditions in default bail, the Court can only impose such conditions to ensure that the accused will appear before the court concerned for trial and will also co-operate with the investigation. An accused in detention shall be released on bail after the period of detention mentioned in Section 167(2), if he is prepared to and furnish bail. This statutory right cannot be circumvented by imposing onerous conditions. Such arbitrary condition imposed while granting statutory bail amount to infringement of the fundamental right of the detenue under section 21 of the constitution of India.”
Case Title: XXXXX v Union Of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 709
The Kerala High Court denied permission for medical termination of pregnancy to a 14-year-old minor girl who was almost nine months pregnant, in a plea filed by her mother.
The Court reached the aforesaid conclusion based on the findings in the medical report that the pregnancy was at an advanced stage and that the foetus was thirty weeks old with a good foetal heartbeat.
The Court further noted that the accused who was in custody under the POCSO Act, and the minor victim had developed a consensual relationship and that she was not forced into sexual intercourse. However, considering that the age of the victim was only 13 to 14 years, the Court stated that this was certainly statutory rape.
Justice Devan Ramachandran expressed empathy with the minor victim and her family but denied the request for medical termination of pregnancy considering that the pregnancy was at an advanced stage.
“This Court is saying as afore only for one reason, namely that the pregnancy is now very advanced, with the Medical Board speaking with unanimity that the “uterus corresponded to 30 weeks of gestation with good foetal heart”. The foetus has, in fact, life with heart rate; and hence, termination of the pregnancy at this stage is impossible, as also untenable. The Medical Board is also unambiguously of the view, as available from the record, that termination is not possible, but that the baby can only be taken out through a Caesarean section - which is to say, that it will be born alive, with a prognosis of a good life in future.”
Case Title: Pinchu Chandran v Arya J
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 710
The Kerala High Court recently held that the Family Court can strike off the defence of the opposite party, only as a last resort on failure to pay interim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC during the pendency of maintenance proceedings.
In terms of the proviso to Section 125 CrPC, the Court can issue an order for payment of interim maintenance during the pendency of maintenance proceedings and such orders shall be disposed of within sixty days from the date of service of notice on the opposite side. Section 128 CrPC pertains to the procedure for enforcement of maintenance orders including orders for interim maintenance.
In allowing the plea, by granting the husband a last opportunity to pay maintenance, Justice C.S. Dias relied upon the Apex Court decisions in Kaushalya v. Mukesh Jain (2020), Rajnesh v. Neha (2020) and held thus:
“Perhaps, it is keeping in mind the bottlenecks in the procedure and to uphold the majesty of the Court, the Honourable Supreme Court in the afore-cited precedents has held the defence of the erring husband/father/son can be struck off in a proceeding under Section 125, as a last resort, on his failure to pay interim maintenance.”
Case Title: Suo Moto High Court of Kerala v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 711
The Kerala High Court recently took suo motu cognizance of pendency of petty cases before Magistrates in the State and noted that as on date, 1.59 lakh petty cases were pending. It was held that in summons cases, Magistrates have power to stop proceedings under Section 258 CrPC, instituted otherwise than upon complaint, when the presence of the accused cannot be secured despite best efforts of the prosecution.
The Division Bench comprising Dr. Justice AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath made it clear that Section 258 CrPC empowered a Magistrate to order stoppage of proceedings at any stage of the trial, after issuance of summons and before completion of trial. It observed that proceedings can be stopped when the Magistrate is satisfied that the presence of the accused cannot be secured before the court owing to the incorrect/fake address of the accused or for any other valid reasons, despite the prosecution having made sincere and earnest efforts.
“In our view, not only is the power vested in the Magistrate sufficiently wide in its nature and scope but also in cases where the presence of the accused cannot be secured notwithstanding the earnest and sincere efforts of the Prosecutor, the Magistrate is duty bound to exercise his/her power to stop the proceedings. The Magistrate must record reasons before stopping the proceedings and releasing the accused. “
Case Title: Baiju v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 712
The Kerala High Court observed that the appellate court has to pass a speaking order by applying its mind for ordering deposit of minimum 20% compensation/fine amount under Section 148 of Negotiable Instruments Act as a condition to suspend sentence.
On appeal against conviction for dishonor of cheque under Section 138 NI Act, the appellate court as per Section 148 NI Act has the power to grant suspension of sentence pending appeal with imposition of a condition for payment of minimum 20% of compensation/fine amount as ordered by the trial court.
Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan, on relying upon the Apex Court decision in in Jamboo Bhandari v. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (2023) observed that deposit of minimum 20% compensation/fine amount was not an absolute blanket rule while considering suspension of sentence. It held that the appellate court has the duty to decide whether it has to impose such a condition for payment of compensation/fine amount and pass a speaking order by recording its reasons.
“Therefore, the duty of the appellate court is firstly to decide whether such a deposit is to be Bhandari's case (supra), when an accused applies under S.389 of the CrPC for suspension of sentence, he normally applies for grant of relief of suspension of sentence without any condition. Therefore, when a blanket order is sought by the appellants, the Court has to consider whether the case falls within the exception or not. The appellate court while suspending a sentence cannot pass a blanket order in all cases to deposit 20% of the fine or compensation without assigning any reason.”
Case Title: XXX v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 713
The Kerala High Court directed the Ernakulam District and Sessions Judge to conduct a fact finding enquiry on the allegations raised by the survivor in the 2017 actor sexual assault case pertaining to unauthorized access and copy and transfer of the visuals from the Memory Card relating to the incident.
Justice K. Babu, passed the Order on a plea filed by the survivor seeking a court-monitored investigation into the alleged leakage of visuals from the Memory Card, and the change in hash value of the memory card thereof, that was kept in court custody.
"The District and Sessions Judge is at liberty to seek the assistance of any agency including the police for conducting the enquiry. The petitioner is at liberty to present written submissions before the District and Sessions Judge. In the inquiry, if the commission of any offence is disclosed, the District and Sessions Judge shall proceed as provided in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973," it observed.
Case Title: XXX v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 713
The Kerala High Court laid down comprehensive guidelines to be followed by law enforcement agencies and Courts while handling sexually explicit materials.
The Single Judge Bench of Justice K. Babu issued the guidelines while ordering a 'fact-finding enquiry' on the allegations raised by the survivor in the 2017 actor sexual assault case pertaining to unauthorized access and copy and transfer of the visuals from a Memory Card relating to the incident.
Case Title: Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) v. Director, Directorate of Enforcement and connected matter
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 714
The Kerala High Court set aside the Single Judge's order granting permission to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to issue fresh summons to former Finance Minister Dr. T.M. Thomas Issac and the officials of the Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB), in connection with the Masala Bonds case.
ED had issued summons to KIIFB, and the then Finance Minister, Dr. Issac, alleging violations of provisions under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) for raising funds by issuing rupee-denominated bonds (masala bonds) abroad.
Taking note that the Order issued by the Single Judge Bench of Justice Arun had been a detailed one, the Division Bench comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen observed that,
"..propriety demands that without hearing the matter, a Single Judge cannot pass an Order virtually modifying the earlier Order passed by another Single Judge".
Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case Considering Parties Solemnized Marriage
Case Title: Adarsh Thinkal T.S v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 715
The Kerala High Court has quashed a rape case based on false promise of marriage, finding that the parties (accused and de facto complainant) had gotten married under the Special Marriage Act.
Taking into account the Marriage Certificate produced and the submissions, Justice Gopinath P observed thus:
“I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to succeed. The offences alleged against the petitioner cannot sustain in the light of the fact that the petitioner has now married to the de facto complainant/victim.”
Case Title: Suo Moto v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 716
The Travancore Devaswom Board informed the Kerala High Court that 3 newly constructed Nadapandals in Pamba Manappuram will open for pilgrims in evening, with each having capacity to accommodate approximately 640 pilgrims.
Based on the submission that construction of the 3 Nadapandals was complete, the Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K Narendran and Justice G Girish stated thus:
“In such circumstances, this SSCR is disposed of by directing the Travancore Devaswom Board to ensure that the newly constructed Nadapandals at Pamba Manappuram are opened to the pilgrims today itself.”
Case Title: Jagadesh Ramachandran v The Maintenance Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 717
The Kerala High Court recently observed that senior citizens cannot be denied the company and presence of siblings and close relatives, as long as they desire it.
The petitioner's son was aggrieved by the order of the Maintenance Tribunal that directed the senior citizen mother to be relocated to his aunt's (mother's sister) house.
Justice Devan Ramachandran noted that both the son as well as the sister of the senior citizen were expressing their concern and wanted to ensure her well-being. It thus noted that more inquiries were required to be conducted by the Maintenance Tribunal since the son submitted before the Court that he was providing all facilities to his mother.
Provisions For Self-Assessment Are More Onerous Than Regular Assessment Regime: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Artech Realtors Versus Intelligence Officer
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 718
The Kerala High Court has held that filing an untrue or incorrect return assumes more rigour in the teeth of the onerous obligation, resulting in the imposition of a penalty.
The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh has observed that provisions for self-assessment create an obligation on the assessee to file a correct return, which is more onerous than in a regime that mandates regular assessment. Filing of an untrue or incorrect return in view of sub-clause (d) of Section 67(1) assumes more rigour in the teeth of the onerous obligation, resulting in the imposition of a penalty without reference to whether there has been disclosure made in the books of account or not.
Other Sigificant Developments This Week
Case Title: M.S. Sajeev Kumar v. Hewlet-Packard Global Soft PVT Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number: CC No. 498/2021
The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ernakulam recently held that the issuance of poorly printed bills on low-quality paper or with inferior ink amounts to 'deficiency of service' or 'unfair trade practice'.
The Bench comprising President D.B. Binu, and Members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia T.N. relied upon the decision in Tata Chemicals Ltd. vs Skypak Couriers Pvt. Ltd. (2001), which laid down that the inclusion of terms and conditions and other particulars in bills is crucial for ensuring consumers' rights to be informed about the prices of products or services they purchase or hire.
It added that this also provides them with documentary evidence to support claims in Consumer Commissions that they had indeed bought products or hired services from a specific trader or service provider.
"In many countries, including India, consumer protection laws ensure the right to a durable and legible bill or receipt when making purchases, which includes clear and readable details of the transaction, durability against wear and tear, comprehensive itemization including prices and charges, clear indications of taxes and surcharges, information on return policies and warranties, recommendations for retention period, options for electronic receipts, and support from consumer protection authorities in case of disputes or issues," the Bench observed.
Case Title: P.G. Manu v. State of Kerala
Case Number: Bail Appl. 10796/ 2023
The Kerala High Court orally noted that former Senior Government Pleader P.G. Manu who is presently facing allegations of sexual assault of a female client on the guise of providing legal assistance for her, ought not to be given special consideration solely on the ground that he is a lawyer.
Manu had resigned from his post as Senior Government Pleader following allegations of raping the woman victim who had approached him for legal advice.
"It should not appear that because the accused is a lawyer, some special consideration is being granted...whatever be the status of the accused, the same considerations ought to apply," Justice Gopinath P. said.
Case Title: Aloshius Xavier v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Case Number: W.P.(C) 40569/2023
Kerala Students' Union (KSU) President Aloshius Xavier has approached the Kerala High Court seeking judicial inquiry into the stampede deaths that occurred at the Cochin University of Science and Technology (CUSAT) campus on November 25, 2023.
The tragic incident had claimed lives of 3 engineering students and one outsider, during a music concert that was to be conducted at the open air theatre in the campus, as part of the tech-fest.
Case Title: Aloshius Xavier v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Case Number: W.P.(C) 40569/2023
The Kerala High Court sought report on the enquiries conducted over stampede deaths at Cochin University of Science and Technology (CUSAT) Campus on November 25, 2023.
The order came in response to KSU President Aloshius Xavier approaching the High Court for a judicial inquiry into the stampede deaths that occurred at CUSAT campus, claiming lives of 3 engineering students and one outsider, during a music concert that was to be conducted at its open air theatre as part of the tech-fest.
The petitioner alleged that the stampede had occurred due to several lapses on the part of the University and the investigation team was not conducting a fair investigation.
Taking note of the submissions of the Additional Advocate General and the Standing Counsel for the University Aravindakshan Pillai that a judicial enquiry may not be ordered at this juncture when the official agencies and the University had commenced their own enquiries, Justice Devan Ramachandran observed:
"The incident in question has perhaps never happened in Kerala before, but it shocks conscience of collective community because of horrible aftermath it has left on collective conscience. Brilliant lives who would've been treasures to the nation were lost, and obviously, answers will have to be found so that solutions can then be put in place not in the manner of a pavilonian reaction as is normally done, but with integrity and certainty in future".
Case Title: Santhosh M.S. v. Manager, Sports Terrain
Case Number: CC No. 240/ 2021
The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ernakulam recently held that repeated installation of inferior quality football turf despite payment of the full amount for installing a superior quality turf, would constitute unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection Act.
The Bench comprising President D.B. Binu, and Members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia T.N. held that the failure of the supplier to provide FIFA standard 'LIMONTA' brand artificial turf despite accepting full payment for the same, amounted to a clear deficiency in service, and consequently awarded Rs. 1,14,700/- as compensation to the complainant.
Indian Law Silent On Giving Child Right To Renounce Adoptive Parents: Amicus Tells Kerala High Court
Case Title: XXX v. Child Welfare Committee
Case Number: WP(C) 35823/2023
The Kerala High Court has been told that the "emancipation process" which could bestow an adopted child the right to renounce his/her adoptive parents as the legal guardians, could prove to be detrimental to the child in the long run.
The development arises in the interim report submitted by Advocate Parvathi Menon A., who had been appointed as the Amicus Curiae in a plea moved by the adoptive parents seeking the permission of the Court to annul the adoption of a girl (now a major).
The petitioners had sought annulment of adoption on the ground that the child was unable to integrate with the family, and was also attacking the adoptive mother.
Advocate Menon informed the Single Judge Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran today that the Indian legal scenario is silent on the concept of emancipation of minors from parental authority both antecedent to and subsequent to the attainment of 18 years of age.
Case Title: Muhammed Ismail K. & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Case Number: WP(C) 40825/ 2023
The Kerala High Court restrained the Panchayat Secretaries from disbursing amounts from Panchayat funds for the conduct of 'Nava Kerala Sadas' against the resolution of the panchayat council.
'Nava Kerala Sadas' is a program involving direct interaction of top officials with the people and redressal of their grievances. It seeks to address the issues faced by the community in four main sectors, namely, health, education, agriculture and housing, with the aid of local self-governments.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas passed the interim order on a plea filed by the Presidents and Vice Presidents of certain Panchayats in Malappuram and Kozhikode Districts.
Case Title: Aliyar T.M. v. M/S SBI Cards & Payment Services Ltd.
Case Number: C.C. No. 380/ 2020
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ernakulam recently held that unauthorized transactions exceeding the credit limit of an account holder, particularly when such a person did not opt for over-the-limit transaction, would constitute a deficiency of service.
The Bench comprising President D.B. Binu, and Members V. Ramachandran, and Sreevidhia T.N. relied upon the decision in State Bank of India v. P.V.George (2019) which laid down the duty of care banks have in protecting the interests of the customer, including safeguarding them from unauthorized transactions.
"As per the Reserve Bank of India's guidelines, customers are not liable if the fault lies elsewhere in the system. In this case, the bank's failure to prevent unauthorized transactions and secure the electronic banking environment constitutes a breach of its duty, and it cannot evade liability by shifting the blame entirely onto the customer," the Bench observed.
Case Title: V.V. Pankajakshan Nair v. Union of India & Ors.
Case Number: W.P. (Crl.) No. 1272/ 2023
A plea has been moved in the Kerala High Court seeking proper and effective investigation under the supervision of the Director General of Police in the case involving the looting of 100 crores of money by a group of persons under the guise of the National Federation of Tourism and Transport Co-operatives of India (NFTCI), which is a multi-cooperative society functioning under the Central Government.
The petitioner, who is the former Chairperson of NFTCI, avers that a parallel website of NFTCI was started by one Ram Naresh Thakur, who claimed to be the Managing Director of the society and several others claiming to be office bearers of the same.
Case Title: Zeba Salim v. M/S VLCC Health Care Ltd. & Anr.
Case Number: C.C. No. 365/ 2022
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ernakulam recently ordered a refund of fees to a student who had enrolled in courses offered by VLCC Institute, Kochi, but subsequently got cancelled due to failure on the part of the institute to offer timely classes, even through online mode.
The Bench comprising President D.B. Binu, Members V. Ramachandran, and Sreevidhia T.N., underscored the importance of protecting consumers in the education sector, by ensuring refund of fees to students who choose to leave a course midway.
"ln the field of education, while many coaching institutions offer valuable services to prepare students for higher education, there unfortunately exists a presence of unscrupulous coaching institutions engaging in unethical practices. exploiting students and their families. These institutions should not have the right to retain the fees of students who choose to leave a course midway due to dissatisfaction with the services provided. It is essential to ensure fairness and prevent these institutions from imposing unfair terms and conditions. Protecting consumers, particularly in the education sector is of utmost importance to guarantee that students and parents are treated with the respect and honesty they deserve," the Bench observed.
Former Supreme Court judge Justice S Ravindra Bhat said that the Constitution cannot be termed as a colonial document merely because it was a modification of the Government of India Act 1935 and emphasised that the Constitutional ideals cannot be discarded as some colonial vestige.
He was delivering a lecture on 'Shedding the Colonial Hangover-Perspectives on Indianizing the Legal System', organized by the Kerala Judicial Academy and the Indian Law Institute - Kerala Chapter, at the Kerala High Court.
Case Name: Kevin Peter Thomas v Union of India
Case Number: WPC 41078/2023
A plea has been moved before the Kerala High Court seeking a direction to the Government of India and to the Election Commission of India to prohibit 26 opposition political parties from using the acronym “I.N.D.I.A.” (Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance) as the name of their political alliance for upcoming 2024 Parliamentary elections.
A Division Bench Comprising Chief Justice A.J. Desai and Justice V. G. Arun adjourned the plea for hearing at a later date.
Case Title: Unmesh V. v. Vijayan George & Anr.
Case Number: C.C. No.318/2019
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ernakulam recently directed a food catering service to pay a compensation of Rs. 40,000/- to a complainant who got afflicted with food poisoning, after consuming unsafe food served at a wedding reception.
The Bench comprising President D.B. Binu and Members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia T.N. found that the complainant endured significant inconvenience, mental distress, hardship, and financial loss due to the negligence of the caterers, which amounted to deficiency in service.
Case Title: Aravind G. John v. M/S Arya Bhangy Motors
Case Number: C.C. No. 173/2018
The Ernakulam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission recently held M/S Arya Bhangy Motors liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for providing a 2017 model Honda Unicorn motorcycle with bent chassis and instability to a customer who had specifically requested the 2018 model.
The Bench comprising President D.B. Binu and Members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia T.N. ordered the dealer to pay a compensation of Rs. 1,05,660/- to the complainant for the 'significant service deficiency' as a result of which the latter endured considerable inconvenience and hardship.
Case Numbers : WP(C)Nos.13652, 23970 & 37874 of 2023
The Kerala High Court passed an interim order allowing petitioners who had approached the Court through three different pleas to undergo surrogacy using donor oocytes since they were unable to produce oocytes naturally due to medical conditions.
The Court passed the order while hearing pleas challenging the recent amendment introduced by the Central Government in the Surrogacy Regulations Rules, 2022.
Case Title: Gireesh Babu v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Case Number: Crl. Rev. Pet. 890/ 2023
The Kerala High Court suo moto impleaded and issued notice to the respondents in a revision petition filed by (deceased) Gireesh Babu that sought investigation into the alleged bribery carried out by high-ranking public officials of the State including the Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter- Veena Thaikandiyil, and her company Exalogic Solutions Pvt. ltd. (1st and 7th accused respectively), of having received illegal consideration under the guise of her father in connection with the mining and other business interests of the Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL).
Case Name: Manoj Kumar B v. Ministry Of Consumer Affairs & Others
Case Number: WP(C) 41145/ 2023
A public interest litigation has been moved before the Kerala High Court against various private educational institutions for removal of prefixes such as 'India', and 'Indian' before their names, contrary to the provisions of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act. The plea stated that such prefixes are used to mislead and deceive the students that such private institutions are promoted by the Government.
While considering the matter, a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice A.J. Desai and V.G. Arun has issued notice to the educational institutions who are arrayed as respondents- Lakshya Indian Institute Of Commerce Private Limited, Indian Institute Of Emergency Medical Services, Indian Institute Of Hotel Management Studies, Indian Institute Of Financial Planning, Indian Institute Of Dental Technology And Indian Institute Of Paramedical Science & Technology.
Case Name: Asokan K. M. v. State of Kerala
Case Number: WP(Crl) 1285/ 2023
A new Habeas Corpus petition has been moved before the Kerala High Court by the father of Dr Akhila @ Hadiya whose conversion to Islam and subsequent marriage to Shafin Jahan was considered by the High Court as well as the Supreme Court on various earlier occasions.
The present plea filed by Ashokan, Hadiya's father stated that he was unable to contact or trace her whereabouts for the last month and thus sought for the issuance of the writ of habeas corpus.
A Division Bench comprising Justice P.B.Suresh Kumar And Justice Johnson John will take up the case next week.
Case Title: Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) v. Director, Directorate of Enforcement and connected matter
Case Number: WP(C) 26228/ 2022 and WP(C) 25774/ 2022
The Kerala High Court heard the arguments of counsels appearing for former Minister Dr Thomas Issac, Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) and Enforcement Directorate (ED), in the masala bonds case.
A Division Bench had set aside the order of the Court that permitted issuance of fresh summons to Dr Issac and KIIFB.
The Court has asked the ED to provide verifiable reasons on which the investigation was being conducted against Dr Issac and KIIFB. It also sought information from the ED to prove its jurisdiction to conduct the investigation under the FEMA.
Case Title: Mrs. Sindhu Suryakumar v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case Number: W.P.(C) No.34989/2023
The Kerala High Court directed Facebook-India to submit an affidavit regarding compliance of its earlier order that ordered removal of an offending Facebook post made by a former sub-court judge against Executive Editor of Asianet News Network Sindhu Sooryakumar.
“The 4th respondent is directed to file an affidavit as to how and in what manner the orders of this Court dated 17/11/2023 and 24/11/2023 have been complied with.”, Justice Mohammed Nias CP said.