Law Times, High Court Road, Kochi (2026)

08/06/2026

*2026 KLT OnLine 1789*

*Service -- High Court of Kerala -- Constitution of India Art.226 --The employee was ordered to be assigned to the “e-Courts project” and further stipulated that she shall be used by the Technical Director of the National Informatics Centre of the High Court “for implementation of the “e-Courts project -- In such circumstances, the employer cannot take a stand that the employee does not have any experience in the “e-Courts project”, solely because she was earlier working as a System Assistant in the “Planning and Management Unit” at the High Court of Kerala.*

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Devan Ramachandran & Hon’ble Mr.Justice Basant Balaji
High Court of Kerala v. Aneena Joseph
Decided on 2nd June, 2026
For Appellants : Adv. M.R.Anison
For Respondents : Adv. K.M.Firoz
Logon to : https://kltonline.net/judgmentsearch/judgementview?id=eB00BO
*For Mobile App users : Please use App to access the judgment*

08/06/2026

*2026 KLT OnLine 1769*

*Constitution of India, Art.226 -- SOP for NCRP -- Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for National Cybercrime Reporting Portal (NCRP) Citizen Financial Cyber Fraud Reporting and Management System (CFCFRMS), Custody, Restoration of Money and Grievance Redressal, Dt.2.1.2026 -- Debit freezing/lien -- Clause 10 of the SOP provides for a time-bound Grievance Redressal Mechanism for the Account Holders in whose accounts the amounts are put on hold or whose account operation is suspended. It is for the Petitioner to work out his remedies in accordance with Clause 10 of the SOP, with respect to the frozen/lien/hold amount.*

Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.A. Abdul Hakhim
Aswin Krishna v. South Indian Bank
Decided on 1st June, 2026
For Petitioner : Advs. Goutham Krishna U.B. & Subi S Binu
For Respondent : Advs. Tony Augustine (Government Pleader),16 Vidya Gangadharan, Sunil Shanker & Thomas Glaison
Logon to : https://kltonline.net/judgment/judgementview?id=eB00qw
*For Mobile App users : Please use App to access the judgment*

08/06/2026

*2026 KLT OnLine 1773*

*Securitisation And Reconstruction of Financial Assets And Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002, S.14 -- It cannot be disputed that the power exercised by the CJM/ACJM under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is a ministerial act -- The CJM does not perform any quasi judicial function and there is no element of application of mind in the process, since it does not involve any adjudicatory process.*

Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.V. Balakrishnan
Authorized Officer, Axis Bank Ltd. v. Reji Paulose
Decided on 1st June, 2026
For Petitioners : Advs. P. Paulochan Antony, Sreejith K. & G.Viswanathan
Logon to : https://kltonline.net/judgment/judgementview?id=eB00qB
*For Mobile App users : Please use App to access the judgment*

08/06/2026

*2026 KLT OnLine 1776*

*Service -- Constitution of India, Art.226 -- Since there is no allegation of mala fides or other vitiating factors imputed against the abolition of the posts in question, it becomes unnecessary and impermissible for any further evaluation under the ambit of Article 226 of the Constitution of India.*

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Devan Ramachandran & Hon’ble Mr. Justice Basant Balaji
Sreeparvathy v. High Court of Kerala
Decided on 22nd May, 2026
For Appellants : Adv. Sivan Madathil
For Respondents : Advs.S. Radhakrishnan & Sunil Kumar Kuriakose (Government Pleader)
Logon to : https://kltonline.net/judgment/judgementview?id=eB00-0
*For Mobile App users : Please use App to access the judgment*

08/06/2026

*2026 KLT OnLine 1765*

*National Trust for the Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act 1999, S.2(g) -- In the face of the statutory provisions, medical literature and disability certificates issued by competent authorities, the conclusion arrived at by the District Collector that Down Syndrome does not fall within the purview of the Act seems to be erroneous.*

Hon’ble Mr.Justice C.S.Dias
Satheesh Kumar v. District Collector
Decided on 3rd June, 2026
For Petitioner : Adv. S.Dileep (Kallar)
For Respondents : Advs. Joseph Chandy & K.R.Ranjith (Government Pleader) As Amicus Curiae : Adv. Sathyasree Priya Easwaran
Logon to : https://kltonline.net/judgment/judgementview?id=eB00OA
*For Mobile App users : Please use App to access the judgment*

07/06/2026

*2026 KLT OnLine 1778*

*Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002, Ss.3, 5 & 50 -- The registration of a scheduled offence is a prerequisite only for penal prosecution under Section 3 and not for the civil action of attachment under Section 5 or the exercise of inquiry powers under Section 50 of the PMLA.*

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. & Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.V. Jayakumar
M/s. Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd. v. Directorate of Enforcement
Decided on 5th June, 2026
For Appellants : Advs. Siddharth Luthra, Arshdeep Singh Khurana, Sulakshan V.S., Kartikeya Dang, Himanshu Kasturi, Simran Khurana, Somansh Gupta, M. Gopikrishnan Nambiar, K. John Mathai, Joson Manavalan, Kuryan Thomas, Paulose C. Abraham Raja Kannan & Vidisha Bajaj
For Respondent : Advs. A.R.L. Sundaresan (Addl.Solicitor General of India) Zoheb Hussain & Jayashankar V. Nair
Logon to : https://kltonline.net/judgmentsearch/judgementview?id=eB00-E
*For Mobile App users : Please use App to access the judgment*

07/06/2026

2026 KLT OnLine 1781

Motor Vehicles Act 1988, S.166 -- Unless proper evidence is adduced to establish that the other claimants were dependent on the deceased, they cannot be treated as dependents and, consequently, are not entitled to compensation under the head of loss of dependency.

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Devaki
Decided on 4th June, 2026
For Appellant : Advs. Mathews Jacob (Sr. Advocate) & P. Jacob Mathew
For Respondents : Advs. M.V. Thamban, R.Reji Arun Bose, Thara Thamban & B. Bipin
Logon to : https://kltonline.net/judgmentsearch/judgementview?id=eB00Ee
For Mobile App users : Please use App to access the judgment

07/06/2026

*2026 KLT OnLine 1779*

*Co-operative Societies Act 1969 -- Consumer Protection Act 1986, S.3 -- Consumer Protection Act 2019, S.100 -- Merely because the rights and liabilities are created between the members and the management of the Society under the Act and Forums are provided, it cannot take away or exclude the jurisdiction conferred on the Forums under the Consumer Protection Act which is provided intentionally to serve a definite cause in terms of the objects and reasons of the Act.*

Hon’ble Justice Dr. A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar & Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Preeta A.K.
Puthur Service Co operative Bank Ltd. v. Sethumadhavan
Decided on 2nd June, 2026
For Appellant : Advs. M. Sasindran & Sreehari Indukaladharan
For Respondent : Adv. K.P. Suresh Kumar
Logon to : https://kltonline.net/judgmentsearch/judgementview?id=eB00-B
*For Mobile App users : Please use App to access the judgment*

07/06/2026

*2026 KLT OnLine 1780*

*Constitution of India Art.226 -- Custody of child -- A lawyer’s duty extends beyond the client to the court, to the administration of justice and to the society -- As an officer of the court and a guardian of the Rule of Law, a lawyer must uphold the constitution of India, assist in the dispensation of justice and ensure that legal expertise is not employed to perpetuate illegality or injustice.*

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice J. Nisha Banu & Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen
Sreedhanya Bhaskaran v. Balakrishnan
Decided on 5th June, 2026
For Petitioner : Advs. Nirmal S., Veena Hari, Varun Muraleedharan, Merin Jose & Lamiya Shanavaz
For Respondent : Adv. Remasmrithi V. K.
Logon to : https://kltonline.net/judgmentsearch/judgementview?id=eB00Ew
*For Mobile App users : Please use App to access the judgment*

07/06/2026

*2026 KLT OnLine 4265 (SC)*

*Criminal P.C. 1973, S.311 -- The power under Section 311 CrPC cannot be exercised merely to fill up lacunae in the defence case.*

*Criminal P.C. 1973, S.311 -- The witnesses cannot be expected to face hardship of appearing in court repeatedly, particularly in sensitive cases as it can result in undue hardship for the victims, especially so, of heinous crimes, if they are required to repeatedly appear in Court to face cross-examination.*

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta & Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
State of Tripura v. Panna Ahmed
Decided on 26th May, 2026
Logon to : https://kltonline.net/judgment/judgementview?id=eB00EA
For Mobile App users : Please use App to access the judgment

Law Times

08/06/2026

08/06/2026

08/06/2026

08/06/2026

08/06/2026

07/06/2026

07/06/2026

07/06/2026

07/06/2026

07/06/2026

Address

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Contact The Practice

Shortcuts

Share

Category