#keralahighcourt Archives - Page 4 of 9

17 Nov

The Kerala High Court rejected the vote of supposedly self-selected candidate cites ambiguity/uncertainty in ballot paper

Title: Bastin Babu v. State of Kerala
Decided on: 15 November, 2023

+ WP (C) No. 18229 of 2023

CORAM: HON’BLE Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas
Introduction

The Kerala High Court noted that the voter’s purpose was determined by the ballot paper and not by any prior or subsequent expressions when it denied a voter who was also a candidate. The voter said that since he cast his ballot for himself, it should be accepted.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner and the sixth respondent, who were running for the position of chairman of the Cochin Corporation’s Standing Committee on Education and Sports, made an accusation against each other, which the court was reviewing. They were both Cochin Corporation council members. As a candidate, the petitioner claimed that the sixth respondent had not properly voted for himself in accordance with Rule 11 of the Kerala Municipality Standing Committee Rules, 2000. The returning officer declined to take the accusations into consideration, despite them being made during the election. The sixth respondent received four votes out of the seven total that were counted, and they were elected. The petitioner used the Right to Information Act to get copies of the ballot papers and then filed the writ petition. According to the petitioner, the sixth respondent did not cast their vote in accordance with Rule 11’s guidelines. The election process for the Chairman was outlined in Rule 11. Members are required by law to cast their votes by writing a ‘X’ next to the candidate’s name on the ballot. The voter next has to sign his name and paste his signature on the back of the ballot paper.

Courts analysis and decision

The petitioner’s name and the name of the sixth respondent were marked on the ballot, the court observed after looking through it. It was mentioned that although Rule 11 required the alphabet “X” to be indicated, the sixth respondent’s marked sign was unclear and did not resemble the alphabet “X.” Consequently, the Court denied the sixth respondent’s vote and granted the writ petition. Additionally, it overturned the choice of the sixth respondent to lead the Cochin Corporation’s Standing Committee on Sports and Education.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Hargunn Kaur Makhija

Click here to view your judgement

17 Nov

The Kerala High Court orders Medical Board Constitution to take into account 22-year-old law student’s request for scribe because of fibromyalgia

Prime Legal

Blog #keralahighcourt

Title: Abitha P. Sunil v. State of Kerala
Decided on: 15 November, 2023

+ WP(C) NO. 37824 OF 2023(C)

CORAM: HON’BLE Justice T. R. Ravi
Introduction

The District Medical Officer, Thrissur (DMO) and the Superintendent of the Thrissur General Hospital were instructed by the Kerala High Court to form a Medical Board to review the request of a 22-year-old law student who wants to get a certificate so she can use a scribe to help her write her upcoming exams.

Facts of the Case

The student, who is enrolled in Government Law College, Thrissur’s five-year integrated LL.B. programme and is currently in her tenth semester, claimed to have chronic fibromyalgia, a condition marked by diffuse musculoskeletal discomfort. She stated that the illness results in excruciating pain and weakness, which interferes with her day-to-day activities. She also claimed that the pain and weakness greatly slows down her writing when she is doing tasks. The petitioner made arguments before the college principal and the controller of examinations, requesting a scribe to help write the exam, in light of the university’s notification that the seventh semester will begin on November 20, 2023. However, the petitioner was advised by the authorities that in order to hire a scribe, she would need to get a certificate from the Medical Board that was established at the District Hospital in Thrissur. Given that the examination is scheduled to begin shortly, she thus addressed the court to request that the respondents give prompt consideration to her request and establish a medical board for the purpose of issuing the necessary certificates.

Courts analysis and decision

In order to allow the petitioner to obtain a scribe for the exams, which are scheduled to begin on November 20, 2023, the court issued an interim directive to respondents 5 and 6 instructing them to take into consideration Exts. P7 and P8, form a Medical Board, and issue the necessary Certificate to the petitioner. Permits must be obtained by November 18, 2023, at the latest.

Written by- Hargunn Kaur Makhija

Click here view to your judgement

6 Nov

The Kerala High Court to decide the matter relating to regulation of Childbirth Centres by Midwives after Infant Death

Prime Legal

Blog #childbirth, #keralahighcourt, #midwives

Title: Fathimathu Suhara v. Union of India

Date: 03 November, 2023

+ WP (C) No. 36379 of 2023

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr. Devan Ramachandran

Introduction

The couple filed a plea with the Kerala High Court , alleging that their newborn child died as a result of inadequate care and medical attention from the Cochin Birth Village, a natural birthing center that provides midwifery care. The district police chief (rural) of Ernakulam was also impleaded as an additional respondent.

Facts of the Case

The plea claimed that the hospital was understaffed during the delivery and that it lacked the qualified medical staff and other amenities that were promised. It was said that the infant displayed signs of infant jaundice and had a yellowish skin tone during birth. The Cochin Birth Village staff allegedly ignored these symptoms and did not administer treatment. The petitioners claim that the Cochin Birth Village’s inadequate care and medical attention caused them to lose their kid. The plea claimed that on January 22, 2023, the petitioners and the infant were hastily released from their care, and that the same day the infant died due to a high fever. Allegations surfaced that Cochin Birth Village is a birth centre that presents itself as a healthier and alternative to hospitals for childbirth, employing the midwifery form of care for delivery. The petitioners argued that, discounting other incidental costs, they paid more than eighty-eight thousand rupees for giving birth at Cochin Birth Village.

Courts analysis and decision

The matter is further listed for consideration on 9^th November, 2023.

Written by- Hargunn Kaur Makhija

Click here to view your judgement

1 Nov

The Kerala High Court ruled in favor of the company, applying the “reverse onus” principle and convicted the accused in a cheque bounce case.

Prime Legal

blog, Blog # Supreme Court, # Writ Petition, #keralahighcourt, Blog, Prime Legal

Title: POPULAR MOTOR CORPORATION VS STATE OF KERALA

Decided on: 17^th, OCTOBER 2023

Writ C No. – 1412 OF 2011

CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.S. DIAS

INTRODUCTION

The High Court of Kerala in Ernakulam, India, heard this criminal appeal case. It concerns claims made in accordance with Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act regarding dishonored checks. Popular Motor Corporation, the appellant, filed the complaint against Vinod Bhaskar, the accused, who was found not guilty by the trial court because of alleged flaws in the complaint.

The High Court considered whether the complainant firm had the legal authority to file the complaint after the case was appealed. The accused was found guilty after the High Court reversed the trial court’s ruling in favor of the complainant. This case raises legal concerns about the prerequisites for submitting complaints under Section 138, especially in situations where the complainant is a business or is represented by authorized staff. It also highlights how the burden of proof in these kinds of situations is shifted to the accused.

FACTS OF THE CASE

Popular Motor Corporation lodged a complaint against Vinod Bhaskar in this instance for sending out two cheques that bounced. The High Court decided in favor of Popular Motor Corporation, highlighting the complainant’s legal position and the accused’s obligations under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, despite the trial court’s finding that the accused was not guilty.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION

The High Court ruled in favor of the company, applying the “reverse onus” principle and convicting the accused. In addition to being sentenced to one day in prison, the accused was also mandated to pay the company damages.

Written by- Kusuma R

Cheque Bounce Case Kerala Hc

26 Oct

The Kerala High Court stated that judicial separation cannot be given as an alternative when divorce grounds under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act are unproven.

Prime Legal

Uncategorized # Writ Petition, #dismissed, #divorce, #Jurisdiction, #keralahighcourt

Title: S v. D & connected matter

Decided on: 18, September 2023

Writ C No. – 148/2014

CORAM: The Honorable Mr. Justice Anil. K. Narendran and The Honorable Mrs. Justice Sophy Thomas.

INTRODUCTION

The Kerala High Court is hearing a case involving a marital dispute. According to Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the husband filed an Original Petition (OP) alleging matrimonial cruelties and an illicit relationship between his wife and her brother in order to obtain a divorce from her. The divorce petition was denied by the Family Court, but a judicial separation decree was approved. Furthermore, the husband was recognized by the Family Court as the child’s biological father and given compensation, all without the need for any special pleadings or prayers. Both parties then filed appeals in the case—the wife against the judgment of judicial separation and the husband against the dismissal of his divorce petition.

FACTS OF THE CASE

In this case, a husband requested a divorce, claiming that his wife had an extramarital affair with her brother and conceived despite the fact that their union had not yet been consummated. In order to establish that he wasn’t the child’s biological father, he also asked for a DNA test. The wife wished to keep the marriage intact and refuted these accusations. The husband was named the child’s father by the Family Court, which also granted judicial separation and awarded the child compensation, even though the divorce was denied. The ruling was appealed by both parties.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION

The Kerala High Court rejected a husband’s request because there was insufficient proof to back up the husband’s allegations of his wife’s supposed adultery, the Kerala High Court denied the husband’s request for a divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act. The court further decided that judicial separation was not an acceptable substitute remedy. It stressed that a long-term absence alone does not prove an irreversible marital breakdown and chastised the Family Court for overstepping its bounds of authority. The husband’s appeal for divorce was denied, the wife’s appeal was upheld, and the judicial separation decree was annulled. The wife’s costs were also mandated to be covered by the husband.

Written by- Kusuma R

Kerala Hc 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 … 9