K.J. Baby v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Feb 2022WP(C)/15062/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two writ petitions concerning partnership disputes, the Court held that an arbitrator appointed by order dated 04.01.2022 shall adjudicate the matters. Consequently, the writ petitions were closed and disposed of by leaving substantive rights pending before the arbitrator.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were closed as the disputes shall be resolved by the appointed arbitrator.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The writ petitions were closed as the disputes shall be resolved by the appointed arbitrator.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 20TH MAGHA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 15062 OF 2020

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

K.J. BABY,AGED 57 YEARS
S/O. K.K. JOSEPH, AT PRESENT RESIDING AT NO.3/59,
OXFORD STREET, EPPING, NEW SOUTH WHALES, AUSTRALIA-
2121 (FROM KATTOKARAN HOUSE, POOZHIYIL ROAD, WEST
HILL, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 005) REPRESENTED BY HIS
POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SMT. SHEELA P., AGED 56,
RESIDING 1/206 B, ASHWATHY, WEST HILL P.O.,
KOZHIKODU, PIN-673 005.

¶7

BY ADVS.
R.SURAJ KUMAR
SMT. SALINI N.
SMT.ANJANA R.S.

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, TAXES (EXCISE) DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 014.

¶10

2 THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., NANDAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 033.

A compact analysis

K.J. BABY,AGED 57 YEARS S/O. K.K. JOSEPH, AT PRESENT RESIDING AT NO.3/59, OXFORD STREET, EPPING, NEW SOUTH WHALES, AUSTRALIA- 2121 (FROM KATTOKARAN HOUSE, POOZHIYIL ROAD, WEST HILL, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 005) REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SMT. SHEELA P., AGED 56, RESIDING 1/206 B, ASHWATHY, WEST HILL P.O., KOZHIKODU, PIN-673 005.

`EXHIBIT P1`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEED OF PARTNERSHIP DATED` `30.11.2006 F THE PETITIONER FIRM`
`EXHIBIT P2`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE FL-3 LICENSE ISSUED BY THE` `EXCISE COMMISSIONER`
`EXHIBIT P3`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE FL-3 LICENSE RENEWAL` `CERTIFICATE DATED 29.03.2019`
`EXHIBIT P4`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED` `21.11.2016 SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT`
`EXHIBIT P5`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED` `16.09.2019 SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT`
`EXHIBIT P6`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.11.2019` `IN WPC NO.30864/2019 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE` `COURT`
`EXHIBIT P7`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.02.2010` `IN WPC NO.456/2020 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE` `COURT`
`EXHIBIT P8`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE 13.05.2020` `SENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT`
`EXHIBIT P9`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED` `ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 08.04.2020`
`EXHIBIT P10`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER REJECTING EXT.P9` `APPLICATION ACKNOWLEDGMENT TAKEN FROM THE` `WEBSITE`
`EXHIBIT P11`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER B.E.X` `C/6044/2019/X.C 1 DATED 17.08.2020 PASSED` `BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT`
`EXHIBIT P12`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE DECISION SURESH BABU VS` `STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS REPORTED IN` `20002 KHC 299`
`EXHIBIT P13`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE DECISION, GEORGE JOSEPH VS` `COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE AND OTHERS REPORTED` `IN 2015 KHC 873`
`EXHIBIT P14`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING` `DATED 12.09.2019`
`EXHIBIT P15`	`PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAWYERS NOTICE DATED` `29.06.2020 ISSUED ON BEHALF OF THE 4TH` `RESPONDENT`
`EXHIBIT P16`	`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. EXC/1151/2019-X` `C.7 DATED 22/07/2020 PASSED BY THE EXCISE` `COMMISSIONER`

`PETITIONER EXHIBI` `EXHIBIT P1`	`TS` `TRUE` `DEED`	`COPY` `DATED`	`OF THE` `30.11.`	`RE-CONSTITUTE PARTNERSHIP` `2006.`
`EXHIBIT P1(A)`	`TRUE` `PARTN`	`LEGIB` `ERSHI`	`LE COPY` `P DEED.`	`OF THE RE-CONSTITUTED`
`EXHIBIT P2`	`TRUE`	`COPY`	`OF THE`	`LETTER DATED 15.11.2016.`
`EXHIBIT P3`	`TRUE`	`COPY`	`OF THE`	`RETIREMENT DEED DATED NIL.`
`EXHIBIT P4`	`TRUE` `THE C`	`COPY` `OMMIS`	`OF THE` `SIONER,`	`LETTER DATED NIL SENT TO` `CALICUT CORPORATION.`
`EXHIBIT P5`	`TRUE` `WATER`	`COPY` `AUTH`	`OF THE` `ORITY.`	`REQUEST BEFORE KERALA`
`EXHIBIT P6`	`TRUE` `THE D` `STAND` `DISTR`	`COPY` `ESIGN` `ARDS` `ICT.`	`OF THE` `ATED OF` `AUTHORI`	`LETTER DATED NIL SENT TO` `FICER, FOOD SAFETY AND` `TY OF INDIA, KOZHIKODE`
`EXHIBIT P7`	`TRUE`	`COPY`	`OF THE`	`AFFIDAVIT DATED 5.12.2016.`
`EXHIBIT P8`	`TRUE`	`COPY`	`OF THE`	`REQUEST DATED NIL.`
`EXHIBIT P9`	`TRUE` `26.11`	`COPY` `.2016`	`OF THE` `SUBMIT`	`DECLARATION DATED` `TED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.`
`EXHIBIT P10`	`TRUE` `RESPO`	`COPY` `NDENT`	`OF THE` `DATED`	`AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 4TH` `21.11.2016.`
`EXHIBIT P11`	`TRUE`	`COPY`	`OF THE`	`REQUEST DATED 21.11.2016.`
`EXHIBIT P12`	`TRUE`	`COPY`	`OF THE`	`POWER ATTORNEY DATED NIL.`
`EXHIBIT P13`	`TRUE` `17.9.`	`COPY` `2019.`	`OF THE`	`LAWYERS NOTICE DATED`
`EXHIBIT P14`	`TRUE` `25.9.`	`COPY` `2019.`	`OF THE`	`REPLY NOTICE DATED`
`EXHIBIT P15`	`TRUE` `THE W`	`COPY` `IFE O`	`OF THE` `F THE P`	`REQUEST 28.7.2019 SENT BY` `ETITIONER SMT. REENA BABY.`
`EXHIBIT P16`	`TRUE` `CIRCL`	`COPY` `E INS`	`OF THE` `PECTOR`	`REPLY SENT BY THE EXCISE` `KOZHIKODU DATED 7.9.2019.`
`EXHIBIT P17`	`TRUE` `6.11.`	`COPY` `2019.`	`OF THE`	`REPRESENTATION DATED`
`EXHIBIT P18`	`TRUE` `6.11.` `OFFIC`	`COPY` `2019` `E AUS`	`OF THE` `ISSUED` `TRALIA.`	`POSTAL RECEIPT DATED` `FROM THE EPPING POST` `.`
`EXHIBIT P19`	`TRUE` `9.7.2` `WAS F` `AUTHO`	`COPY` `019 E` `ORWAR` `RITIE`	`OF THE` `VIDENCI` `DED TO` `S.`	`POSTAL RECEIPT DATED` `NG THAT THE REPRESENTATION` `OTHER STATUTORY`
`EXHIBIT P20`	`TRUE` `IN WP` `HON'B`	`COPY` `C NO.` `LE CO`	`OF THE` `30864/2` `URT.`	`JUDGMENT DATED 22.11.2019` `019 ON THE FILE OF THIS`

K.J. Baby v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Biji Mathew Vs the Secretary and Registrar of Birth and Deaths

Prakash. B.P. Vs Mony Roy

Omana Punnoose Vs State of Kerala

Queens Hotel Vs the Excise Commissioner

K.J. Baby v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Biji Mathew Vs the Secretary and Registrar of Birth and Deaths

Prakash. B.P. Vs Mony Roy

Omana Punnoose Vs State of Kerala

Queens Hotel Vs the Excise Commissioner

Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Vs the Deputy Tahasildar