w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Joseph Thomas @ Jose & Others v/s State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam


Company & Directors' Information:- A V THOMAS AND CO LTD [Active] CIN = U51109KL1935PLC000024

Company & Directors' Information:- J THOMAS & CO PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U51909WB1947PTC015276

Company & Directors' Information:- N J JOSE AND CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U55101KL1979PTC003037

Company & Directors' Information:- THOMAS AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201DL1997PTC085284

Company & Directors' Information:- JOSEPH AND CO PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U01211KL1954PTC000507

Company & Directors' Information:- E R JOSEPH & CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U28920WB1955PTC022404

    CRL.A. No. 1368 of 2015

    Decided On, 09 August 2019

    At, High Court of Kerala

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. SHAFFIQUE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANIL KUMAR

    For the Appellants: P. Vijaya Bhanu, Sr. Advocate, Arun Jose Thomas, P.M. Rafiq, V.C. Sarath, M. Revikrishnan, Vipin Narayan, Ajeesh K. Sasi, Pooja Pankaj, Sruthy N. Bhat, Advocates. For the Respondents: S.U. Nazar, Sr. P.P.



Judgment Text

Shaffique, J.

1. Appellants herein are before us challenging the verdict dated 28/10/2015 of the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Thodupuzha in S.C. No. 8 of 2014. The case arise out of Crime No.125 of 2009 of Upputhara Police Station with C.P. No. 54 of 2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - I, Peerumedu. By virtue of the said verdict, appellants three in number were found guilty for offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with a default stipulation of rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each for the said offence.

2. Case of the prosecution against the appellants is as follows:

1st, 2nd and 3rd accused herein, in furtherance of their common intention of vindicating their grudge for the indecent behaviour of the deceased Martin towards the wife of 1st accused, visited his house bearing House No. III/266 of Ayyappancovil Panchayat, in Ayyappancovil Village at 11.30 p.m., on 01/06/2009 in a jeep bearing no. KL-06 7625 and thereafter 2nd accused called out Martin who was sitting in the verandah of house to Charumoodu- Kunnelpady road at a distance of 16.60 metres of the house of the 2nd accused, inflicted cut injuries repeatedly on the hands and legs of Martin using a sword and thereby severed his right foot. While 1st accused stabbed him on his right waist and buttock repeatedly and the third accused encouraged them in committing the said acts. Martin died on the spot due to the injuries sustained to him. Hence accused were charged for offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of I.P.C.

3. Prosecution relied on the oral evidence of PW1 to PW17, adduced documentary evidence in the form of Exts.P1 to P26 and got identified MO1 to MO11 material objects. After the closure of prosecution evidence, accused were questioned under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C') to explain the incriminating circumstances appearing against them. They denied all allegations and pleaded innocence. From the side of the defence, DW1 was examined. Exts.D1 and D2 were also marked.

4. Learned Senior counsel appearing for and on behalf of the accused/appellants argued that there is no believable evidence in the case at hand to implicate the accused herein. Court below erred in convicting them. PW2, PW15 and PW4 are relatives of the victim and Court below ought to have found that their evidence is self-contradictory and inconsistent with other evidence. The deceased was a known goon of the State and he was accused in many criminal cases including a murder case. There were so many enemies for him to grind axe against him. An independent witness by name Abhini was available in the house of the deceased at the time of incident. But he is not examined. Medical evidence did not support the version of so called occurrence witnesses. As far as 3rd accused is concerned, even if we believe the prosecution case, there is absolutely no evidence to indicate that he had any common intention to commit offence as alleged. He pleaded to acquit the appellants.

5. On the other hand, learned Senior Public Prosecutor argued that evidence of PW2, PW15 and PW4 conclusively proves the involvement of all accused in the murder of Martin. Overt acts done by each accused is clearly spoken to by PW2 and PW15. There is no omission or contradiction in their evidence. Medical and other evidence fully corroborate their version. Common intention of the accused are clearly established. He sought to dismiss the appeal.

6. On hearing both counsel in detail, we are to confine our discussion to the following points, especially the correctness of the finding of the Court below on the said aspects. Firstly, whether death of Martin was a homicide or not. Secondly, whether accused caused injuries on the deceased which resulted in his death. Thirdly, whether accused entertained any common intention to commit the offence as alleged.

7. Prosecution evidence can be summarized as follows: PW1 Moncy gave Ext.P1 FIS based on which Ext.P11 FIR was registered by PW14. PW2 Athulya Martin is the daughter of the deceased. She is cited as an eyewitness to the incident. PW3 Ajith turned hostile to the prosecution. Exts.P2 and P2(a) were marked through him. PW4 Beena Joseph is the wife of the deceased. She deposed incidents which happened subsequently to the alleged actual commission of the offence by accused including telephonic conversation between herself and 1st accused. PW5 Damodaran was declared hostile to the prosecution. He stated that he did not see the recovery of sword effected through 2nd accused. Ext.P4 is marked through him. PW7 Dr.B.K. Jameskutty is the then Lecturer in Forensic Medicine and Assistant Police Surgeon at Medical College Hospital, Kottayam. Ext.P6 is the post-mortem certificate. PW8 P.J.Garvadis is the then Scientific Assistant, FSL. He examined Mahindra Jeep bearing number KL-06-7625 and blood stains were collected on a cotton swab. PW9 Reji Baby is the then Village Officer, Ayyappancovil who prepared Ext.P7 site plan. PW10 Chacko turned hostile to the prosecution. But he admitted his signature in Ext.P8 mahazar. PW11 also declared hostile to the prosecution. He admitted that he signed near the residence of 1st accused. PW12 Satheesan also turned hostile to the prosecution. He admitted his signature in Ext.P10 mahazar. PW13 laid charge- sheet after verifying records. PW14 recorded Ext.P11 FIR based on Ext.P1 statement of PW1. PW15 Adheena Martin is another daughter of the deceased. She is also cited as an occurrence witness. PW16 is the Circle Inspector of Police who conducted the investigation. He prepared the inquest, scene mahazar, arrested accused, seized material objects, recovered MO1 sword based on Ext.P3(a) disclosure statement of A2 as per Ext.P3 mahazar. MO3 VKC Pride chappal was seized as per Ext.P9 mahazar based on Ext.P9(a) confession statement of A1. Ext.P19 is the forwarding note for sending items mentioned in Ext.P23 property list for FSL examination. Ext.P24 is the FSL report. MO2 knife was recovered based on Ext.P8(a) confession statement of 1st accused as per Ext.P8 mahazar. PW17 Thomas Alexander is the then Assistant Director, Serology in FSL, Thiruvananthapuram. Ext.P24 report is prepared by him and Ext.P24(a) is a correction report regarding typographical error crept in mentioning blood group. By Ext.P24(a), it is corrected as group 'B'.

8. Death of Martin is a homicide is proved by the prosecution through the evidence of eyewitnesses as well as medical evidence. Ext.P5 is the inquest report. PW7 conducted autopsy of the victim and Ext.P6 is the post-mortem report issued by her. She deposed that altogether 30 fatal injuries were found on the corpse of Martin. Right foot was severed completely. According to her, injuries found on the body of Martin could be possible using MO1 and MO2 as weapons of offence. All these evidence proves that death of Martin was a result of an armed attack on him and it was a homicide.

9. Who actually committed the offence is to be looked into next. Learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that accused/appellants herein caused said injuries in furtherance of their common intention to murder Martin. PW2 and PW15 who are daughters of the deceased are occurrence witnesses. PW2 Athulya Martin deposed that she knew the accused. The deceased is her father. He died on 01/06/2009. During that time, they were residing at Marykulam. From 2007 onwards they were staying there. During 2009, she completed her 10 th standard. In their home, herself, her mother, father and two sisters were residing. Her mother is a nurse at Government hospital, Fort Kochi. On the date of incident, her mother was not in the house as she was on duty. By 09.00 p.m., A2 Biju uncle reached her house. Before that, A1 Jose chettan called her father over phone. Her father and A2 engaged in a conversation by sitting in the sit out area. At that time, A1 and A3 came in front of their house in a jeep. A1 hurled abusive words generally. A1 asked the deceased to come out as there is liquor with him and urged him to have liquor. Her father replied that he will not come as he stopped drinking. A1 called her father. Her father went out to the courtyard. Her father was taken to the road by holding his hands, on compulsion. Suddenly, she heard a huge cry from the road. They rushed to the road and saw her father falling down. A1 and A2 were dragging her father through the ground by holding on his legs. A3 was also there. As they approached them crying, A2 Biju uncle intimidated them with the sword. He abused and sent them away. They came 2 to 3 steps backward. As they turned around, they saw accused cutting their father. A2 Biju was having a sword in his hand. A1 Jose was holding a knife. A3 Thomas was having a chopper in his hands. Infliction of injuries continued for about 5 minutes. Her father prevented the cuts by using his hands. After inflicting injuries, accused went to their house in the jeep. Herself and her elder sister ran to their father. There was no dhothi on the body of their father. Blood was seen on his body. PW2 went to their house and brought dhothi. Her father was screaming. She ran to the house of Raju and told the matter. Nobody came from there. PW2 came back and went to the house of Benny and sought for vehicle. But the vehicle was having some trouble. PW2 went to the house of Noble. Noble contacted somebody over phone. PW2 came back to the place where her father was lying. At that time, people gathered there. PW2 and her sister were taken to Tinu's house. She identified MO1 as the sword used by A2 Biju, MO2 as knife in the hands of A1 Jose, MO3 VKC Pride chappal as the chappal belonging to A1 Jose, MO4 black chappal belonging to her father, MO5 as her own chappal, MO6 as the shirt of her father, MO7 as the kaily mundu worn by her father, MO8 to MO10 as other kailies brought by her from her house, and MO11, the medicine bottle she had brought from her house to the place of occurrence. According to her, accused were in good terms with them and their father. She does not know the reason for the accused attacking her father. During cross examination, she stated that she did not tell the police that A2 Biju had caught hold on the hand of her father and took him out of the house. She also admitted that she did not tell the police that A3 Thomman and A2 Biju had come in a jeep. She denied the suggestion that her father was a drunkard, a goon leader and accused in many criminal cases. She also denied the suggestion that her father was an accused in Kappiri Appachan murder case. She admitted that Adhini was the friend of her father. On the date of incident, Adhini was present in the house. He was present in the house at the time of incident as well. From Saturday onwards, Adhini was there in their house. Road is lying below her house. On walking 30 seconds, it is possible to reach the house of Raju. It is possible to see road by sitting in the sit out. She denied the suggestion that as her father and Adhini were going out from their house, somebody had caused harm to her father. She further denied the suggestion that Adhini worked as a betrayer for those who killed her father. She stated that she had seen the weapon and identified them before police. In re-examination, she stated that at the place of occurrence, light was available from their house, Raju's house and also moonlight was available.

10. PW15 stated that deceased is her father. She knows the accused. The incident happened on 01/06/2009 at 11.00 p.m. During that time, she was studying for her plus two course. She reached her house from school on 04.30 p.m. Her father was there at home. After 08.00 p.m., A2 came to their house. Her father, Adhini and A1 were eating boiled tapioca and having conversation. By 10.30-11.00 p.m., A1 reached there in a jeep by sounding horn and stopped near the house. A1 and A3 alighted from the jeep and came to the front of the house and A1 started hurling abusive words. He was drunk. A1 asked the deceased to come out of the house. Her father came out from the sit out of the house and sat on the ground near the mango tree. A1 called the deceased to join for drinking. Martin told that he stopped drinking and at that time A2 also invited Martin, as he was also there for company. As Martin was about to go, PW15 told him not to go. Her father went along with them stating that Sabu was also there and there is no need to worry. PW15 and her sister also went after them. In front of the jeep, she saw the accused beating her father and pushed her father down. As they ran towards them, her father was dragged away. PW2 and PW15 went there crying aloud, A1 and A2 brandished a sword and made them to run away. After sometime, they again went to the spot and saw accused inflicting injuries on her father. A2 was having a big sword, A1 had a knife and A3 was holding a chopper. They inflicted cut injuries on her father for 5 to 6 minutes. Witnesses cried aloud. After inflicting cut injuries, they got into the jeep and left. They ran to their father and caught hold on his hands. He was groaning. His hands and legs were full of injuries. Right leg was cut and severed. Her sister went and called Raju uncle. She identified MO1 as the weapon in the hands of A2, MO2 as the weapon with A1. She also identified MO3 chappal. She stated that weapons were shown to her and got identified by police. Her sister went home and brought mundu and medicine. From the phone taken from the pocket of their father, the matter was informed to their mother and Motta chettan, who is a friend of Martin. They were asked to inform A2. But she told in reply that it was A2 who inflicted the injuries. After half an hour, Bipin, Tinu, Raju and others came there. They shifted PW2 and PW15 to another house. In the morning, they came to know that their father died. According to PW15, on the date of incident at 04.30 p.m., A1 called her father Martin over phone and asked him to reach Marykulam. But her father did not go. He asked to come to have conversation here. During cross examination, she stated that she had seen A2 coming to their house and started conversation. A2 reached after 08.30 p.m. At 10.00 p.m. also, A2 was there. Her version that A1 came to their house hurling abusive words and that A3 was having a chopper in his hands were shown to be omissions. Also, the version that her sister went to their home and brought mundu and medicine to the spot is also brought out to be an omission. It is also brought out as an omission that her father walked out and sat on the ground below the mango tree. She categorically denied suggestions put forth by the defence that her father was in jail and that he was accused of Appachan's murder case and that he shifted his residence from Chungam to Idukki because of threats out of gang rivalry and that Adhini was a gang member of her father. She also denied the suggestion that her father met with the alleged calamity as part of a retaliation from the side of team from the side of Appachan who was murdered. She agreed that her father had finance dealings. Seeing the incident, Adhini left the place. She also admitted that they were in good terms with family of accused. She reiterated that it was accused who committed the crime.

11. PW4 Beena Joseph is the wife of the deceased. She deposed that on 01/06/2009, her husband died. On that day, she was on duty in Government hospital, Fort Kochi. Accused were their neighbours. On 01/06/2009 at 08.00 p.m., her husband Martin called her over phone. He told her that Jose called him to buy parts for jeep and he asked whether he had to go as he was feeling something foul. PW4 asked Martin whether there was any issue. He replied that he would say it later. PW4 told him that if it be so, he need not go. Again PW4 called Martin. At that time, Martin was waiting to go to Marykulam with Jose in an autorickshaw. PW4 objected the same again. She told him not to go as children were alone in the house. She again called after 10.00 p.m., Martin told her that he was talking to Bijumon and that he would call back after 10 minutes. By 11.30 p.m., daughter called her and told that Martin was attacked by Jose and others and he is lying with severe injuries. PW4 contacted the wife of A2 namely Sofiya. Then A1 Jose took the phone and told PW4:

"MALAYALAM".

Then the phone was disconnected. PW4 reached her house at 05.30 a.m. Body of Martin was lying on the road. Relatives did not show her the dead body. After the incident, she did not stay in the said house. During cross-examination, she admitted that a person by name Adhini was there in their house at the time of incident. He was present in the house from previous Saturday onwards. Adhini is a friend of Martin. At the time of the marriage with Martin, Martin was an autorickshaw driver. Their marriage was a love marriage. She admitted that Martin was an accused in a murder case. She was a witness in that case. She denied the suggestion that her husband was a member of goons led by Thalayolaparambu Shukkoor. She denied the suggestion that Adhini played the role of a betrayer and her husband died because of goon rivalry.

12. As far as the identity and overt acts of A1 and A2 are concerned, evidence of PW2 and PW15 is clear and categoric. Only minor omissions are brought out in their evidence as far as the involvement of A1 and A2 are concerned. Overt acts committed by these accused are proved beyond reasonable doubt. The testimony of PW2 and PW15 corroborate each other and it is further corroborated by the medical evidence already detailed above. Learned counsel for the accused/appellants argued that the nature of injuries were not clearly brought out in medical evidence. Also, the post mortem findings were not made part of evidence as the concerned Doctor did not depose the same in evidence. Since the nature of injuries are not proved, the accused cannot be held liable for offence under Section 302 of I.P.C.

13. We are unable to agree with the said argument. Of course, it is true that the contents of post-mortem examination is not brought out in evidence through the deposition of Doctor. It is a serious omission from the part of the prosecution. But on analysing other aspects, it can be seen that the nature of injuries are brought out in evidence even otherwise. Moreover, he suffered as many as 33 injuries. Other available evidence shows that the victim died on the spot. Evidence of Doctor that deceased died of multiple injuries is proved to be true. We do not find any reason to doubt the ocular version simply on account of the fact that the evidence adduced by the Doctor do not contain number of injuries or the details of the same, especially when he had clearly spoken to the cause of death.

14. Of course, defence has a case that Martin died due to gang rivalry among goons. But there is nothing on record to prove the same. All witnesses denied the said suggestion. Adhini who is a friend of the deceased was also present at the house while the incident happened. It is seen that he is not examined. Learned counsel pointed it out as a drawback on the side of the prosecution to suppress truth. But we do not find that non- examination of Adhini in any way has affected the prosecution case, which otherwise is proved beyond doubt by the evidence of PW2 and PW15 who are none other than the daughters of the deceased. They are natural and probable witnesses. Defence does not have a case that PW2 and PW15 were not present at the house at the time of occurrence. The presence of PW2 and PW15 is proved by the version of PW1 who gave Ext.P1 FIS to police. PW2 and PW15 fully inspire our confidence. Hence, we agree with the learned Sessions Judge that A1 and A2 caused the death of Martin by inflicting fatal injuries on him using sword and knife as deposed to by PW2 and PW15. MO1 sword was recovered based on Ext.P3(a) disclosure statement of A2 as per Ext.P3 mahazar. MO3 VKC Pride chappal was seized as per Ext.P9 mahazar based on Ext.P9(a) confession statement of A1. MO2 knife was recovered based on Ext.P8(a) confession statement of 1 st accused as per Ext.P8 mahazar. Ext.P24 is the FSL report. PW17 Thomas Alexander is the then Assistant Director, Serology in FSL, Thiruvananthapuram. Ext.P24 report is prepared by him and Ext.P24(a) is a correction report regarding typographical error crep

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

t in mentioning blood group. By Ext.P24(a), it is corrected as group 'B'. Above items were proved to be stained with 'B' group blood. In the Jeep also, blood stains were detected. These aspects corroborate the oral evidence adduced by the prosecution. No material is available to show that the case of accused would fall under any of the exceptions enumerated in Section 300 of I.P.C. Hence, they are found guilty for offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. 15. Involvement of A3 is the curious question to be looked into. Prosecution case is that A3 came to the spot in the jeep along with accused and inflicted injuries on the victim. Court below relied on the evidence of PW2 and PW15 to arrive at a finding that A3 is also liable for offence u/s 302 r/w S.34 I.P.C. But it can be seen that the evidence adduced by PW2 and PW15 regarding the presence and involvement of A3, is brought out as omission which amounts to contradiction. PW2 did not state before police that A3 had reached the spot in the jeep along with A1 as alleged. PW16, the Investigating Officer stated that CW3 (PW2) did not give statement before him that A1 had come in a jeep from the direction of Marykulam, that A3 was having a chopper in his hands, that A1 stabbed and A3 cut the deceased. The same aspect is brought out as omission in the evidence of PW2 and PW15 also. As far as the involvement of A3 is concerned, those omissions amount to material contradictions. Hence, it is evidence that both PW2 and PW15 had improved their version before Court as far as involvement of A3 is concerned. There is no recovery of weapon based on the information of A3. Under such circumstances, we are of the view that Court below erred in convicting A3 for the offence under Section 302 read with 34 of I.P.C. Hence, the said conviction is liable to be set aside. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed as under:- (i) Conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge against A1 and A2 is hereby confirmed. (ii) As far as A3 is concerned, prosecution failed to prove the case against him beyond reasonable doubt and hence A3 is acquitted of all charges with the aid of benefit of doubt. Since the 3rd accused is already on bail, his bail bond shall stand cancelled.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

05-10-2020 Sabu Issac Versus Antony Chacko, Working Abroad In USA, Represented by Power of Attorney holder Ansamma P. Thomas High Court of Kerala
30-09-2020 Christopher Joseph O'neill Versus Andrew Bridgman & Others Court of Appeal of New Zealand
11-09-2020 M/s. Unicorn Maritimes (India) Private Limited., Represented by its Director Arul Augustin Joseph Chennai Versus Valency Internation Trading Pvt Limited., Represented by its Director & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-09-2020 George Thomas Kuruvilla & Others Versus State of Goa through Calangute Police Station, Calangute, Bardez, Goa & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
08-09-2020 John Joseph, Advocate, Chairman Voters Alliance, Ernakulam Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary, Department of Local Self Government, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
08-09-2020 Dr. Joseph Freeman Motha & Another Versus Sudha Vijayan & Another High Court of Kerala
19-08-2020 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi Versus Adv. Shiji Joseph & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
14-08-2020 Jollyamma Joseph Versus State of Kerala Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
06-08-2020 The Branch Manager, M/s Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Kodungallur Versus M.M. Jose Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
05-08-2020 Liju Jose & Another Versus Anto P. Ignatious & Another High Court of Kerala
21-07-2020 The District Collector, Ernakulam & Others Versus Fr. Jose Uppani, Director, 'Sneha Sishrushalayam'(Chittoor Retreat Centre), Ernakulam & Others High Court of Kerala
21-07-2020 G. Bhagavat Singh Versus Manoj Joseph & Others High Court of Kerala
21-07-2020 Shoby Joseph & Others Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Superintendent of Police, Crime No. 367 of 2019 of CB, Central Unit-IV, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
17-07-2020 M.G. Jose & Others Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary, Government of Kerala, Department of Home Affairs, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram High Court of Kerala
16-07-2020 Jai Joseph Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by its State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
15-07-2020 Manu Joseph Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
14-07-2020 Thomas Danniel @ Bose Versus J. Rajan, Uthamapalayam High Court of Kerala
13-07-2020 Dr. K.J. Joseph & Others Versus The Mattathur Grama Panchayath, Thrissur, Rep. by Its Secretary & Others High Court of Kerala
01-07-2020 Sony India Pvt. Ltd. Mohan Co Operative Industrial Estate, New Delhi & Others Versus Jose George Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
30-06-2020 Thomas George & Others Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Chief Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
30-06-2020 Bilsy Joseph, now residing at 3743, Falkner Drive, United States of America, Represented by her Power of Attorney holder (Mother), Rosamma Joseph, Kottayam Versus Registrar of Births & Deaths, Changanassery Muncipality, Kottayam & Others High Court of Kerala
25-06-2020 Midhun Thomas Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
22-06-2020 Anto K.Thomas @ Benny & Another Versus Deputy Superintendent Of Police, CB CID, Kottayam, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala High Court of Kerala
19-06-2020 M/s. Virgo Industries (Engineers) Pvt Ltd., Rep. By its Director Reethamma Joseph & Another Versus M/s. Venturetech Solutions Pvt Ltd., Rep. By its Director N. Mal Reddy High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-06-2020 Thomas K. Peelianickal Versus The State Election Commission, Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
08-06-2020 P.P. Jose, Manager, Mattoor, Kalady, Rice Tech Agro Mills Pvt. Ltd. Versus M.M. Abdulkhader, Proprietor, East India Trading Company, Kothamangalam & Another High Court of Kerala
05-06-2020 Biju Thomas Versus The Secretary to Government, Taxes (G) Department, State of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
29-05-2020 Joe Joseph Versus The State of Kerala, Represented by The Principal Secretary To Government, Higher Education Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
04-05-2020 Jobin Joseph Versus Uma Thomas & Another High Court of Kerala
30-04-2020 United Nurses Association, Through Its State President Shoby Joseph, Thrissur Versus Union Of India, Represented By The Secretary, New Delhi & Another High Court of Kerala
28-04-2020 Kane Joseph Manoah Versus The Queen Court of Appeal of New Zealand
16-04-2020 Priya Acka Thomas & Another Versus The Government of India, Rep by its Joint Secretary, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
20-03-2020 Jollyamma Joseph @ Jolly Versus The State of Kerala Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
18-03-2020 Areeplavan Financiers, Represented by Its Proprietor, Siby Thomas Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
17-03-2020 K.T. Joseph & Another Versus Revenue Divisional Officer, Kottayam & Others High Court of Kerala
17-03-2020 The Corporation of Kochi, Represented by Its Secretary, Kochi Versus Thomas John Kithu & Others High Court of Kerala
11-03-2020 Santhosh Antonio S. Netto Versus Joshy Thomas & Others High Court of Kerala
11-03-2020 Shyla @ Shymol Kamalasanan & Another Versus Joseph High Court of Kerala
11-03-2020 M/s. Logical Developers Private Limited, New Delhi, Represented by Its Authorized Signatory Jose Joseph, Kochi & Another Versus M/s. Muthoot Mini Financiers Private Limited, Pathanamthitta, Represented by Its Chairman & Managing Director Roy M. Mathew & Others High Court of Kerala
11-03-2020 Tahsildar, Devikulam, Idukki District & Others Versus Rajan Thomas High Court of Kerala
10-03-2020 Shail Jiju Versus Biju Joseph & Another High Court of Kerala
09-03-2020 V.Y. Thomas @ Sajimon Versus V.Y. Joseph High Court of Kerala
03-03-2020 Jet Airways (India) Ltd., represented by its Airport Manager Versus Thomas Joseph Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
03-03-2020 O. Thomas & Others Versus Dr. Abraham Jose, Prof. of Orthopaedics, Pushpagiri Medical College, Thiruvalla & Another Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
03-03-2020 Leon Thomas Kumar @ Layon Thomas Kumar Versus Mariam Sayanora Thomas High Court of Kerala
03-03-2020 Ayyappan Pillai & Another Versus M. Thomas & Others High Court of Kerala
02-03-2020 Jose Versus Johnson Supreme Court of India
28-02-2020 Sabu Joseph Versus Kerala State Election Commission, Represented by Its Secretary, State Election Commission Office, Thiruvananthapuram & Another High Court of Kerala
25-02-2020 Tirunelveli Diocese Trust Association, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli & Others Versus R. Jayakumar Thomas Jayaraj @ R. Jeyakumar Jayaraj & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
20-02-2020 General Manager, Hmt Machine Tools Ltd., Through Its Deputy General Manager (Hr) Shri Joseph Pradeep Keshri Minz, Ajmer (Raj) & Others Versus Controlling Authority, Under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 & Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Ajmer (Raj) & Others High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench
20-02-2020 Lalu Joseph Versus The State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Proseucutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam for The Circle Inspector of Police, Nilambur High Court of Kerala
19-02-2020 Marthoma Syrian Church, Represented by Most Rev. Dr. Joseph, Marthoma Metropolitan, Thiruvalla & Others Versus Jessie Thampi (Died) & Others High Court of Kerala
19-02-2020 Joy Joseph Versus Desai Homes represented by V.R. Desai & Another Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
18-02-2020 Pramodkumar, I.P.S. Versus O. Thomas, Printer & Publisher, M/s. Deccan Chronicle & Holdings Limited & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-02-2020 E. Arputhadhas Versus E. Joseph (Died) & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
12-02-2020 Jose Mathew Versus The State of Kerala Represented by Its Secretary, Food & Civil Supplies (B) Department, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
12-02-2020 Thomas Versus State of Kerala High Court of Kerala
11-02-2020 Fr. Biju Varkey & Others Versus Fr. Thomas Paul Ramban & Others High Court of Kerala
10-02-2020 Tonymon Joseph Versus General Manager, Southern Railway, Chennai & Others High Court of Kerala
06-02-2020 Jose Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Principal Secretary, Department of Forest, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
05-02-2020 Joshy Versus Subash K. Thomas High Court of Kerala
31-01-2020 N.T. Thomas (Wrongly shown as M.T. Thomas in the Judgment in R.C.A) Versus Suresh Pai High Court of Kerala
31-01-2020 Kolli Venkata Mohana Rao & Another Versus Joseph Christian Krishnaraj (died) & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-01-2020 K.I. Thomas Versus Rajesh Kumar & Another Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
29-01-2020 J. Xavier Versus Joseph High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-01-2020 S. Sindu Versus Chinnamma Thomas High Court of Kerala
27-01-2020 Martin Jose & Another Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Inspector Of Police, Kalady, Rep. By Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
27-01-2020 T.V. Thomas, P.D. Teacher, Govt. U.P. School, Thottumukkom, Kozhikode & Others Versus Joint Secretary, General Education Department, Government of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
23-01-2020 Tata Consultancy Services Limited, TCS Centre, Kochi, Represented by Its Asst. General Manager-HR, Boban Varghese Thomas & Others Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Its Secretary, Labour & Welfare Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
23-01-2020 Solomon Thomas Versus The State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary to Revenue Department, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
23-01-2020 Tata Consultancy Services Limited, Kochi, Represented by Its Asst. General Manager-HR, Boban Varghese Thomas & Others Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Its Secretary, Labour & Welfare Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
23-01-2020 M/s. Rajasthan Patrika Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director & Chairman P. Jose Versus Rajiv Kumar Ishwar & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
20-01-2020 K. John & Others Versus John Joseph & Others High Court of Kerala
14-01-2020 Sam Daniel V/S A.A. Jose & Another High Court of Kerala
14-01-2020 Joseph Yemmiganoor @ Kadakoti Versus State, Through Police Inspector & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
09-01-2020 Bragadier Manoj Kumar Mago Versus Manager, Thomas Cook(Indla) Ltd. Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
03-01-2020 St.Thomas Orthodox Syrian Church Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
19-12-2019 Cochin Port Trust, Willingdon Island, Kochi, Represented by Its Chairman, Jacob Thomas & Others Versus Parisons Roller Flour Mills Private Limited, Calicut & Others High Court of Kerala
19-12-2019 Joseph Tajet Versus State of Kerala Represented by Chief Secretary To Government, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram High Court of Kerala
19-12-2019 Suja Merine Thomas Versus Krishna Pillai High Court of Kerala
18-12-2019 Benny Thomas Versus Sub Inspector of Police Njarakkal Police Station, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
18-12-2019 Thomas Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Circle Inspector of Police, Palarivattom Police Station, by Public Prosecutor, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
16-12-2019 K.M. Thomas, Idukki Versus K.M. Thomas, Kottayam & Another High Court of Kerala
12-12-2019 Nobby M. George, Changanassery Tlauk, Rep. by Power of Attorney holder his mother Alice George, Changanassery Versus Jossy Joseph, Kuttanad Taluk, Now Staying With Her Sister Raji Joseph, Erskine Court, Nanuet 10954, New York, USA High Court of Kerala
10-12-2019 Joseph Charles & Others Versus State, Rep. by Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station-South, Madurai & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
06-12-2019 P.T. Joseph, Proprietor, Cheryl Enterprises, Elamakkara, Ernakulam Versus Kabeer Husain Minanna & Others High Court of Kerala
05-12-2019 Thomas Thoonattu Versus State of Kerala High Court of Kerala
05-12-2019 Jose Olimpia Martins & Others Versus State of Goa, through its Chief Secretary & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
03-12-2019 Fr. Thomas Paul Ramban Versus The District Collector, Ernakulam & Others High Court of Kerala
03-12-2019 P.H. Salim Versus Joji Jose & Another High Court of Kerala
28-11-2019 M. Jeyamary Versus M. Joseph Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
28-11-2019 Joseph Mathai @ Jose Versus State of Kerala, Thiruvampady Police Station, Crime No.199/07 High Court of Kerala
26-11-2019 Mathew Thomas Versus Augustine Sanjeevi Beattie High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-11-2019 Jose Sebastian Versus State of Kerala Represented by Its Secretary To Government, General Education Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
20-11-2019 Hugh James Ford Simey Solicitors Versus Edwards on behalf of the estate of the late Thomas Arthur Watkins United Kingdom Supreme Court
19-11-2019 Roy Thomas @ Soby Versus State of Kerala High Court of Kerala
18-11-2019 Sini Thomas Versus Shaji John High Court of Kerala
18-11-2019 Deepa Rachal George Versus Sherin Annie Joseph & Others High Court of Kerala
14-11-2019 Rev. Fr. L. Joseph Paulraj Versus St. Mary's Cathedral Trust Rep. by its Secretary-cum-Treasurer Rev. Fr. Devaraj & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-11-2019 Jose Philip & Another Versus Muhammed Ali & Another High Court of Kerala