Allowed

The Principal v. Gopalakrishna Pillai

Kerala HC1 Oct 2020WP(C)/13312/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order of the Admission Supervisory Committee (ASC) determining an additional refund amount. The Court held that once a complainant accepted a full and final settlement via affidavit complying with Supreme Court directions, the Committee could not reopen the matter to adjudicate further claims unless fraud or coercion was alleged and proved

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed and the impugned order dated 7/12/2019 passed by the Admission Supervisory Committee setting the payable amount at ₹26,52,000 was set aside.

The Principal Vs Gopalakrishna Pillai — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 9TH ASWINA, 1942

¶7

WP(C).No.13312 OF 2020(L)

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

THE PRINCIPAL KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE, ANJARAKANDI P. O., MAMBA, KANNUR - 670 612.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH)

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI GOKULAM, PRASHANTHI NAGAR, KOTTARAKKARA P. O., KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 506.

¶13

2 THE ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES IN KERALA, T. C. 15/15534, PRASANTHI BUILDINGS, M. P. APPAN ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014, REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.

¶14

R1 BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR R2 BY SMT.MARY BENJAMIN, SC, ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROF. COLLEGES

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 2209-2020, THE COURT ON 01-10-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

-:2:-

J U D G M E N T

Dated this the 1^st day of October, 2020

¶20

Shaffique, J.

¶21

The admissions granted by the Kannur Medical College to the MBBS Course in that college, in the year 2016-17, were found to be illegal and contrary to law by the Admission Supervisory Committee (hereinafter also referred to as the 'ASC') constituted in terms of Section 4 of the Kerala Professional Colleges or Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fee, Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Non-Exploitative Fee and Other Measures to Ensure Equity and Excellence in Professional Education) Act, 2006 Act, [Act 19 of 2006] (now repealed) through an order dated 14.11.2016. The Supreme Court refused to interfere with this order and it became final. As a consequence, the admissions granted to nearly 150 students had to be cancelled. Though the State promulgated an ordinance to regularize the admission, the said ordinance was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

¶22

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶23

-:3:-

¶24

On 25.07.2018 there was a recommendation by the

¶25

ASC to the Kerala University of Health Sciences to withdraw the affiliation/recognition of Kannur Medical College for the academic year 2018-2019. These proceedings were found to be in order by a Division Bench of this Court through a judgment dated 1.8.2018 in W.P.(C) No.25895 of 2018. The matter was carried to the Supreme Court of India through S.L.P (C) No. 23225 of 2018 and connected cases. A consent order was passed on 29.08.2018 in S.L.P (C) No.23225 of 2018 and connected cases which order is on record in this case. We are concerned here only with the 1^st direction that forms part of the consent order dated 29.08.2018 which provides that the college shall return an amount equivalent to the double of the amount collected from the students together with refund of the fee deposited by each one of the 150 students, with the college, by 04-09-2018. There was a further direction that the Admission Supervisory Committee shall ascertain and report as to whether the amounts in question have been refunded, as directed. On 1.9.2018, the Admission Supervisory Committee filed its report which inter alia suggested that the amounts directed to be paid/refunded to each of the students

¶26

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶27

-:4:-

¶28

have not been paid/refunded in terms of the directions issued by the Supreme Court. Therefore, a further direction was issued by the Supreme Court on 4.10.2018 through which it was directed that the Admission Supervisory Committee shall determine the amount payable to each one of the students. The ASC has passed individual orders in respect of claims raised before it by the students/guardians. In this writ petition, we are concerned with an order passed by the Admission Supervisory Committee, in terms of the direction issued by the Supreme Court, determining the amount payable by the petitioner college on account of the fees and other amounts collected from the applicant.

¶29

The question of maintainability of this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India having been questioned at the admission stage, a Division Bench of this Court, to which one amongst us (myself) was a party, came to the conclusion through an order dated 20.2.2020 that the Writ Petition was maintainable. Therefore, we do not propose to go into that issue again.

¶30

Before we proceed to determine the correctness or otherwise of the impugned order, we must notice the

¶31

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶32

-:5:-

¶33

observation of the Supreme Court in the order dated 4.10.2018 that the quantum of amount collected by the College from each student and what amount has been refunded is a seriously disputed fact and also notice the following direction issued to the Admission Supervisory Committee (ASC) by the Supreme Court.

¶34

“The ASC to consider the material which may be placed on record by the respective parties and take a decision in accordance with law on the basis of the evidence adduced in each of the case with respect to each of the students . (emphasis is ours)

¶35

Thus it is clear that the direction given to the ASC was to individually determine the case of each student, in accordance with law, having due regard to the material which may be placed on record and the evidence adduced by the parties. Since the entire exercise undertaken by the ASC was in terms of the aforesaid direction of the Supreme Court, it goes without saying that the ASC was bound to conclude its determination strictly in terms of the direction issued by the Supreme Court.

¶36

We have heard Sri.Abdul Raoof P., learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Mary Benjamin, learned Standing Counsel for the 2^nd respondent and Sri.P.V.S.Sudhir, learned Counsel

¶37

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶38

-:6:-

¶39

appearing for the 1^st respondent, the complainant before the 2^nd respondent Committee. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the ASC had determined the issue based on mere surmises and conjectures and that there was no reliable material before the Committee to hold that the amount in question was payable to the complainant/student. He states that the college has not received any amount other than the admitted amount of 11.65 lakhs and therefore no further liability could be fastened on the college since an amount of 23.30 lakhs being the double the amount of `11.65 lakhs has already been refunded. The learned counsel appearing for the ASC would point out that the ASC which was a Committee under Act 19 of 2006 has not been impleaded in this writ petition and this, according to her, is a fatal defect. She states that the second respondent herein is the body constituted under the enactment which repealed and replaced Act 19 of 2006, namely Act 15 of 2017. On merits, she would contend that the College had indulged in severe malpractices resulting in the orders against them which have already been noticed above. She would urge that we must not interfere with the orders which have been issued by the ASC

¶40

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶41

-:7:-

¶42

after careful scrutiny of all materials placed before it. The learned counsel for the student/complainant would support the findings in the order and urge that we should not interfere with the order.

¶43

We must first consider the question as to whether the

¶44

non-impleadment of the ASC should be a ground to refuse consideration of the matter on its merits. We are of the considered opinion that the ASC is not a necessary party to these proceedings since the Committee is not required to justify its findings before this Court in any manner. We are fortified in taking such a view in the light of the law laid down by a 3 Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in M.S Kazi v. Muslim Education

¶45

Society & Others [(2016) 9 SCC 263].

¶46

The ASC has on 7/12/2019 determined the amount

¶47

payable to student/complainant to be a sum of `26,52,000/-. We have gone through the order impugned before us and perused the materials produced before the ASC in order to determine whether the order passed by the ASC was sustainable and in accordance with the directions issued by the Supreme Court.

¶48

In terms of the Supreme Court order, the college was required to refund the fees and double the amount collected over

¶49

-:8:-

¶50

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶51

and above the fees. Therefore, the Committee determined the

¶52

amount to be refunded in the following manner:-

¶53

Sl.	Particulars	Amount
No.
1	Fee including hostel fee	`11,65,000/-
2	Twice the amount collected over and above the fee (`2,65,200 x 2)	`53,04,000/-
3	Amount already refunded	`38,17,000/-
4	Balance payable (1 + 2 - 3)	`26,52,000/-

¶54

By the impugned order dated 7/12/2019, the petitioner college

¶55

had been directed to pay an amount of `26,52,000/- (Rupees Twenty six lakhs fifty two thousand only) computed in terms with the Apex Court orders dated 29/8/2018 and 4/10/2018.

¶56

The contention urged by the petitioner is that they had collected only `11.65 lakhs towards tuition fee and hostel fee. However, after the judgment of the Apex Court, the entire matter had been settled between them out of Court and after receiving the settled amount, the complainant had filed an affidavit before the Committee that they have received the entire amount in full and final settlement of their claim. Thereafter, it seems that the Committee had issued notice pursuant to which further claim had been made by the complainant.

¶57

Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on

¶58

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶59

-:9:-

¶60

an earlier judgment of this Court in WP(C) No. 26995/2019 dated 22/11/2019 in which this Court had occasion to consider whether matters already settled require to be reopened in the light of the Apex Court judgment. After considering the said issues and having found that some of the students and their representatives have settled the matters, the following directions had been issued:-

¶61

“16. We are of the view that the Committee could undertake enquiry by categorising the students in three categories.

¶62

(i) Students who had been issued notice after 4/10/2018 on the basis of Apex Court order and who had submitted before the Committee that they have received the entire amount in full and final settlement.

¶63

(ii) Students who had received notice based on the Apex Court order dated 4/10/2018 and failed to appear and make their submissions.

¶64

(iii) Students who had objected to the payment made by the college.

¶65

17. As far as category (i) and (ii) are concerned, we are of the view that it shall be open for the Committee to close that complaints and no fresh notice is required.

¶66

18. As far as category (iii) is concerned, the Committee shall consider their claims and pass appropriate orders” .

¶67

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶68

-:10:-

¶69

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the committee had gone beyond the directions issued by this Court and had adjudicated a claim which had been settled even after the judgment of the Apex Court.

¶70

According to the complainant, he had paid an amount 38.17 lakhs to the college. As already stated, this fact is disputed and therefore, it was incumbent on the part of the complainant to have proved the said fact before the Committee as per the directions issued by the Apex Court in its order dated 4/10/2018. Petitioner had produced an affidavit, Ext.P8 which was signed before a notary public on 30/01/2019 in which the 1<sup>st</sup> respondent has stated that he had erroneously claimed an amount of 38.17 lakhs from the college towards fee, hostel charges etc. Paragraphs 1 to 3 of the affidavit reads as under:-

¶71

“1. My daughter, Gopika Krishnan, joined the MBBS Course in Kannur Medical College, Anjarakandy, for the academic year 2016-17. As the admission to the said college was cancelled by Admission Supervisory Committee, we have filed petitions and complaints before various authorities including the Admission Supervisory Committee for Professional Colleges in Kerala (ASG), SHO Chakkarakal and Hon'ble Court, erroneously claiming an amount of Rs.38.17 lakh from the college towards fee paid, hostel charges including the amount of postdates cheques and other

¶72

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶73

-:11:-

¶74

pending grievances.

¶75

2. As per the Consent order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M.A. No.2354 of 2018 dated 4.10.2018 in SLP (C) 23225/2018 dated 29.8.2018, I have already received Rs. 23.30 lakh by Bank transfer/RTGS, which is double the amount of fee paid by me. 3. Subsequently regarding the claim for the hostel charges, complaint pending before the Admission Supervisory Committee and or any other authority and other grievances, the matter is talked over and settled between me and the college and I have received Rs. 4.68 lakh by SBI Cheque No 077546 dated 30.01.2019 from the college towards the full and final settlement, as per the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, I undertake to withdraw the complaint before all authorities filed by me including the Hon'ble Admission Supervisory Committee and or SHO Chakkarakal and or any other bodies. I have already submitted letters memos to that effect. I have no grievance subsisting against them. I undertake to appear before the above Forums in person or through lawyer and submit orally or in writing any other submissions required by to the concerned authorities to fully and effectively closing the entire dispute between me and the college. I have no claim for an amount other than that is received by me. I hereby indemnify the college for any losses that may be sustained by the college on account of any future claim or award in this regard. All claims are effectively settled in full satisfaction and realization of my claim.” This affidavit is filed on 30/1/2019 wherein the 1^st respondent

¶76

admits to have received the amounts after the direction issued by the Apex Court in full and final settlement. Ext.P9 is a letter allegedly issued by the complainant to the Station House Officer

¶77

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶78

-:12:-

¶79

on 30/1/2019 wherein also he has stated that he has received the amounts in full and final settlement of his claims. Ext.P10 is a petition filed by the complainant before the Committee stating that he had received 4.68 lakhs in addition to 23.30 lakhs towards full and final settlement as per the directions of the Apex Court. In paragraph 9 of the impugned order, the Committee has observed that “ a petition was also seen signed by the complainant seeking permission of this Committee to withdraw the complaint pending before the committee and produced the same on 4/2/2019 ”. The Committee further indicated that since no orders were passed on the above complaint, on 2/4/2019, the Committee issued notice to the complainant and the respondent/college to appear before the committee. Complainant thereafter filed a proof affidavit on 8/8/2019 stating that he was compelled to go for a settlement and a request was made to the Committee to grant the same benefits as was given to other students.

¶80

In the light of the aforesaid factual situation, the Committee again thought it necessary to consider the evidence.

¶81

In an additional affidavit filed by the complainant, he

¶82

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶83

-:13:-

¶84

submitted Ext.A1 series which are ledger copies issued by Thrikkannamangal Service Co-operative Bank, Kottarakkara encashing Fixed Deposits in the name of Sri.Midhun Krishnan G. and Smt.Valsalamma and the total amount would come to 13,44,668/-. Ext.A2 is a proceedings of the Director of Panchayats sanctioning 8 lakhs as loan on 1/11/2016. Ext.A3 would show that the complainant's wife had withdrawn 8.5 lakhs on 21/09/2016. In an additional affidavit filed before the Committee, the complainant stated that he had received further amounts of 4.5 lakhs and 3.5 lakhs as loan from his relatives and he had also surrendered a total of 22 fixed deposits and collected money from the society. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, during evidence, the complainant agreed that he received a total amount of 38.17 lakhs from the petitioner college. He received 23.30 lakhs within 3 days from the date of passing of order and a further amount of 14,87,000/was also received. Petitioner has a case that the aforesaid amount was paid to the 1^st respondent taking into account the direction issued by the Apex Court as well and therefore, no further amount was payable and the committee ought to have

¶85

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶86

-:14:-

¶87

rejected the claim. Learned counsel for the petitioner college however would submit that the complainant thereafter contended that he had signed the affidavit only for the purpose of receiving the actual amount paid. Thereafter when notice was received from the Committee, complainant had indicated that he had not received double the amount as claimed.

¶88

From the nature of orders issued by the Apex Court, it is relevant to note that, on 29/8/2018, a consent order was passed. College had offered to return double the amount than the fee deposited by each one of the 150 students by 4/9/2018. The college apparently remitted `23.30 lakhs to several students taking into account the fee paid by them. The argument is that they proceeded on the basis that the Apex Court had directed payment of double the amount of the fee. However, in the order dated 4/10/2018, Apex Court observed that insofar as there is dispute about the amount actually paid to the 150 students, the matter was directed to be placed before the Committee. After the order was passed by the Apex Court on 4/10/2018, when a claim is settled by the college in full and final, and the complainant has prepared an affidavit and filed before the Committee that he had

¶89

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶90

-:15:-

¶91

received the entire amount in full and final settlement as directed by the Apex Court, the complainant could not later on take a view that such an affidavit had been filed under force or coercion. In the light of the Apex Court judgment, the complainant is free to either receive the amount or to get an adjudication by the Committee, especially in a matter where there is a dispute raised by the college regarding the amount received by them. Therefore, when a party to a lis receives an amount in full and final settlement stating that the said amount is received as per the directions issued by the Apex Court, there was no reason for the Committee to have reopened the same and permit the complainant to adduce evidence. It is relevant to note that only when Committee had issued a notice, the complainant suddenly took up a contention that the affidavits were signed to receive the amount immediately. Though it is stated in the proof affidavit Ext.P11 that the complainant was forced to sign the affidavit, no evidence had been adduced to prove the said fact. Committee had come to a conclusion that the affidavit was given without free consent and it was due to undue influence from the part of the college. Whether there was fraud, coercion or undue influence to

¶92

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶93

-:16:-

¶94

vitiate a settlement are matters which could not be adjudicated in a summary procedure. The Committee was directed to consider claims which were disputed. When certain claims were settled after directions were issued by the Apex Court between the students and the Management, it amounts to proper compliance, as per direction issued by the Apex Court. In other words, there was no reason for a further adjudication in the matter when there is a full and settlement as agreed.

¶95

Hence, we are of the view that the exercise undertaken by the Committee when there was a full and final settlement after directions were issued by the Apex Court cannot be justified.

¶96

In the result, the writ petition is allowed setting aside Ext.P12 order dated 7/12/2019.

Sd/-

A.M.SHAFFIQUE

JUDGE

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

-:17:-

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶108

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.08.2018.

¶109

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) NO.23225/2018 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT DATED 29.08.2018. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN M. A. NO.2354/2018 IN SLP(C) NO.23225/2018 DATED 04.10.2018. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO.908/2019 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN SLP(C) NO.23225/2018 DATED 27.09.2019. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE COLLEGE. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING DATED 18.01.2018. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 30.01.2019. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 30.01.2019 FILED BEFORE CHAKKARAKKAKL POLICE STATION. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 30.01.2019 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶110

-:18:-

¶111

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶112

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE PROOF AFFIDAVIT ALONG WITH DEPOSITION.

¶113

EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN ASC(P) 91/18/HO/TVPM/MBBS/KMC DATED 7.12.2019.

¶114

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

¶115

EXHIBIT R1 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 05.09.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES IN KERALA

¶116

EXHIBIT R1 B TRUE COPY OF THE F.D.RECEIPT NO.2/4712 DATED 2307.2016 IN THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G., THE SON OF THE 1 ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KOTTARAKKARA.

¶117

EXHIBIT R1 C TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO. 2/4713 DATED 23.07.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G., THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KOTTARAKARA.

¶118

EXHIBIT R1 D TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4714 DATED 23.07.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA

¶119

EXHIBIT R1E TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4714 DATED 23.07.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA

¶120

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶121

-:19:-

¶122

EXHIBIT R1 F TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4716 DATED 23.07.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 G TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/5008 DATED 23.07.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 H TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/5009 DATED 23.07.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 I TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/5050 DATED 23.07.2016, THE NAME OF VALSALAMMA, THE WIFE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 J TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4370 DATED 19.09.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 K TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4457 DATED 19.09.2016, THE NAME OF VALSAMMA G, THE WIFE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA

¶123

EXHIBIT R1 I TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/ 5067 DATED 19.09.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA

¶124

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶125

-:20:-

¶126

EXHIBIT R1 I TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/ 5067 DATED 19.09.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 M TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/5068 DATED 19.09.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 N TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/5066 DATED 19.09.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 0 TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/5069 DATED 19.09.2016, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 P TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4445 DATED 19.09.2016, THE NAME OF VALSAMMA G, THE WIFE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 Q TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4371 DATED 27.07.2015, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA

¶127

EXHIBIT R1R TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4372DATED 27.07.2015, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA

¶128

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶129

-:21:-

¶130

EXHIBIT R1 S TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4409DATED 26.07.2015, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 T TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4410 DATED 27.07.2015, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA

¶131

EXHIBIT R1 U TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4905 DATED TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/5068 DATED 27.07.2015, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 V TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4916 DATED 27.07.2015, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1 W TRUE COPY OF THE F.D. RECEIPT NO.2/4917 DATED 27.07.2015, THE NAME OF MIDHUN KRISHNAN G, THE SON OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE THRIKKANNAMANGAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOTTARAKKARA EXHIBIT R1X TRUE COPY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY SMT.LEELA R.ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF THE RS 4 LAKSH FORM THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶132

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶133

-:22:-

¶134

EXHIBIT R1 Y TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT, WITH AGAIN THE R.T.G.S. RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, AKNOWLEGING THE REMITTANCE OF RS 2,00,000/- IN FAVOUR OF REJI JACOB TO HIS RESPECTIVE ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY HIM IN THE FEDERAL BANK LTD. KOTTARAKKARA AND FURTHER ATTESTED BY SRI.MATHEWS K.LUCK, ADVOCATE AND NOTARY EXHIBIT R1 Z TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT, WITH AGAIN THE R.T.G.S RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE,ACKNOWLEDGING THE REMITTANCE OF R. 2,50000/- IN FAVOUR OF BINU V.J., TO HIS RESPECTIVE ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY HIM IN THE HDFC BANK, KOTTARAKKARA AND FURTHER ATTESTED BY SRI.MATHEW K.LUCK , ADVOCATE AND NOTARY EXHIBIT R1 AA TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS PERTAINING TO THE AC NO. 67153041434 MAINTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KOTTARAKKARA PULAMON JUNCTION BRANCH, FOR THE PERIOD FROM 08.08.2014 TO 14.06.2017 EXHIBIT R1 AB TRUE COPY OF THE INCOME TAX RETURN FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 PERTAINING TO SMT. VALSALAMMA, THE WIFE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R1 AC TRUE COPY OF THE INCOME TAX RETURN FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 PERTAINING TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R1 AD TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS RELATING TO AC. NO. 67376448561, ISSUED BY THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE.

¶135

WP(C) No. 13312/2020

¶136

-:23:-

¶137

EXHIBIT R1 AE TRUE COPY OF THE CHEQUE DATED 30.01.2019 IN AC NO. 67376448561, MAINTED BY THE DAUGHTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, KOTTARAKKARAPULAMON JUNCTION BRANCH.

¶138

EXHIBIT R1AF TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS PERTAINING TO AC. NO. 67376448561, MAINTED BY THE DAUGHTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT, WITH THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, KOTTARAKKARA-PULAMON JUNCION BRANCH

¶139

EXHIBIT R1AG TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON BEHALF OF HIS DAUGHTER MISS GOPIKA KRISHNAN, TO THE PRINCIPAL, KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE, ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF RS. 10.19 LAKHS FROM THE PRINCIPAL, KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE.

The Principal v. Gopalakrishna Pillai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Principal v. Gopalakrishna Pillai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Kerala Vs Ashok Kumar Thekkan

The Kerala Public Service Commission Vs Rajesh Divakar

Malabar Medical College Hospital and Research Centre Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Sreenivas C. D.

Midhun M.M. Vs Senior Superintendent of Post Offices

The State of Kerala Vs Shyam Sunder T.P.