AI Overview...
Understanding FAO Case No 319 of 2012: Kalkura Court Records
In the world of Indian legal proceedings, FAO Case No 319 of 2012 stands out, particularly with references to advocate R.S. Kalkura in Kerala High Court records. If you're searching for Fao Case no 319 of 2012 Kalkura Court Records, this post breaks down the key details, context, and related judgments drawn from court documents. These cases often involve civil appeals (First Appeals from Orders), property disputes, and procedural matters. While this analysis provides general insights, consult a qualified lawyer for specific advice, as legal outcomes depend on individual circumstances.
Background of FAO No. 319 of 2012
FAO stands for First Appeal from Order, a common appellate remedy under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in Indian courts. The specific FAO No. 319 of 2012 originates from the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam. Court records indicate it was heard on Monday, July 1, 2019 (10th Ashadha, 1941), by Justice Sathish Ninan SAJEEV RAGHAVAN vs CLARAMMA - 2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 82680. The appeal challenged an order in I.A. No. 2034 of 2009 within AS 297/2006 from the Additional District Court (Adhoc)-I, Kottayam, dated 20-01-2012.
- Appellant/Petitioner: Sri. P. Babu Kumar
- Respondents: Involved parties including Sri. Harish Gopinath (R5 & R6), Sri. M.S. Kalesh (Addl. R7 & R8), Sri. P. Yadhu Kumar (R5 & R6)
- Counsel: Notably, Adv. R.S. Kalkura represented multiple parties, highlighting his involvement in this litigation SAJEEV RAGHAVAN vs CLARAMMA - 2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 82680 SAJEEV RAGHAVAN vs CLARAMMA - 2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 82681
The case was heard alongside related proceedings like OP (Civil), suggesting interconnected civil disputes, possibly over property, injunctions, or execution of decrees. Similar references appear in FAO No. 319/2012 linked to O.P. (C) No. 3176/2012, where restoration of appeals was contested Sajeev Raghavan, S/o. Raghavan vs Ramachandran Nair, S/o. Kesavan Nair - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 2296.
Key Legal Issues in the Case
From the records, FAO 319 of 2012 grapples with procedural and substantive issues common in civil appeals:
1. Maintainability of Appeals and Impleadment
The appellant was not originally a party to the suit but was impleaded as an additional 3rd appellant by court order in FAO No. 319/2012. This raised questions on whether non-parties could intervene at appellate stages Sajeev Raghavan, S/o. Raghavan vs Ramachandran Nair, S/o. Kesavan Nair - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 2296. Courts typically allow impleadment under Order I Rule 10 CPC if it prevents multiplicity of proceedings.
2. Court Fee Payments and Delays
Records note postings for balance court fee payments, with defendants applying to contest. Delays in fee payment can lead to dismissals, but courts may condone under Section 149 CPC if justified R RAMESHKUMAR vs MANAGER SBT - 2015 Supreme(Online)(KER) 12216.
3. Linked Proceedings and Disposals
The case connects to FAO 139/2019 and others, where courts directed lower courts to:
- Complete pre-trial steps within 2 months.
- Dispose of cases within 6 months from the order date (e.g., September 3, 2019) A.AHAMMED BASHEER vs SHAFEEK.A - 2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 92424 A.AHAMMED BASHEER vs SHAFEEK.A - 2019 Supreme(Online)(KER) 21426.
Quote from records: Since the pleadings have been completed in these cases, the court below shall allow the parties to complete pre-trial steps, if any, in two months and dispose of the case within a period of six months from today. A.AHAMMED BASHEER vs SHAFEEK.A - 2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 92424
Related Judgments and Precedents
Kalkura's involvement ties into broader litigation patterns. Similar cases reference res judicata and suit maintainability:
- Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Section 34: A suit for declaration without possession prayer is not maintainable. Prior decrees (e.g., O.S. No. 210/2002) bar subsequent claims via res judicata Sajeev Raghavan, S/o. Raghavan vs Ramachandran Nair, S/o. Kesavan Nair - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 2296.
Ratio: A suit without a prayer for recovery of possession is not maintainable. (Paras 10-15) Sajeev Raghavan, S/o. Raghavan vs Ramachandran Nair, S/o. Kesavan Nair - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 2296
Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 92: Oral evidence can't contradict registered documents; burden lies on plaintiffs alleging misrepresentation (Paras 30-31) Sajeev Raghavan, S/o. Raghavan vs Ramachandran Nair, S/o. Kesavan Nair - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 2296.
Other 319 cases provide context, though not directly linked:
- Insurance suppression claims dismissed for lack of evidence Shriram Life Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Santosh Behera - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 4239: The insured's obligation to disclose health status is limited to knowledge of such conditions.
- Criminal acquittals due to evidentiary infirmities under IPC Section 307 State of Uttarakhand VS Jairnail Singh - 2017 8 Supreme 295: A judgment based on serious infirmities deserves to be reversed.
- Jurisdictional disputes, e.g., Magistrate's lack of power under CrPC Section 457 when vehicles are under Forest Act proceedings JAGABANDHU MAHANTA VS BIJAY KUMAR KAR - 2003 Supreme(Ori) 242
These illustrate courts' emphasis on credible evidence and jurisdictional limits, themes potentially echoing in FAO 319/2012.
Role of Adv. R.S. Kalkura
R.S. Kalkura appears repeatedly as counsel (e.g., By Adv: Sri. R.S. Kalkura) in Kerala High Court matters, including consumer forums and appeals Sreenarayana Dharma Sabha,Rep.by Secretary vs George. His presence in FAO 319/2012 underscores experienced representation in protracted civil suits, often involving multiple respondents and procedural challenges.
Procedural Timeline and Outcomes
| Stage | Date | Key Action |
|-------|------|------------|
| Trial Court Order | 20-01-2012 | I.A. No. 2034/2009 in AS 297/2006 |
| High Court Hearing | 01-07-2019 | FAO No. 319/2012 with OP (Civil) SAJEEV RAGHAVAN vs CLARAMMA - 2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 82680 |
| Disposal Directions | 03-09-2019 | Pre-trial in 2 months, final disposal in 6 months A.AHAMMED BASHEER vs SHAFEEK.A - 2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 92424 |
| Related Appeals | 2012-2019 | Impleadment and restoration issues Sajeev Raghavan, S/o. Raghavan vs Ramachandran Nair, S/o. Kesavan Nair - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 2296 |
Final decisions often set aside impugned orders and remit for fresh hearings, emphasizing natural justice and expeditious disposal.
Key Takeaways for Litigants
- Evidence is Paramount: Mere allegations fail without proof, as in insurance repudiations Shriram Life Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Santosh Behera - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 4239 or criminal acquittals State of Uttarakhand VS Jairnail Singh - 2017 8 Supreme 295.
- Procedural Compliance: Timely court fees and impleadment are crucial; delays invite dismissals.
- Appellate Relief: FAOs like 319/2012 allow challenging lower orders, but concurrent findings are sacrosanct unless based on no evidence Mahanth Dhansukh Giri VS State Of Bihar - 1984 Supreme(Pat) 418.
- Res Judicata Applies: Prior decrees bind future suits Sajeev Raghavan, S/o. Raghavan vs Ramachandran Nair, S/o. Kesavan Nair - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 2296.
In most cases, courts prioritize substantive justice over technicalities, but parties must substantiate claims.
Conclusion
FAO Case No 319 of 2012 Kalkura Court Records reveals a typical Kerala High Court civil appeal involving procedural intricacies, represented by seasoned counsel like R.S. Kalkura. Drawing from these and related judgments, the emphasis is on evidence, jurisdiction, and timely justice. This post synthesizes public records for educational purposes—legal situations vary, so seek professional counsel.
For deeper dives into specific aspects or updates, check official court portals like the Kerala High Court website. Stay informed on evolving case laws!
Disclaimer: This is general information based on public records, not legal advice. Consult an attorney for your matter.
Search Results for "FAO Case No 319 of 2012 Kalkura Records Explained"
2024 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 4239 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K. PANIGRAHI
and income - Court determined that no credible evidence supported allegations of suppression - Award directing payment of benefits ... ... ... (C) No.16722 of 2016 was dismissed. ... ... ... Findings of Court: ... The court affirmed the findings of the Permanent Lok Adalat, holding that the insurer's claims of ... hospital, Bhubaneswar, where the hospital took 15 days to search for ....
1953 0 Supreme(Pat) 122 • India - Patna
SINHA, V.RAMASWAMI
Fact of the Case: Petitioner, a tenant, challenged the order of the House Controller directing him to vacate the premises ... Finding of the Court: The Court held that the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947, was constitutional ... The Court also held that the Ordinance and the Amending Act had the effect of reviving and re-enacting the Act of 1947, which had ... Act of 1947 has n....
2017 8 Supreme 295 • India - Supreme Court
R.K.AGRAWAL, A.M.SAPRE
the case: ... The respondent was convicted by the trial court u/s The High Court reversed the judgment and order of the trial court ... ... Finding of the Court: ... ... the record of the case, we find no merit in the appeal. ... Section 307 IPC and Session Trial Case No.319 of 2000 for the offence punishable under Section ....
1952 0 Supreme(Cal) 77 • India - Calcutta
HARRIES, DAS, S.R.DAS GUPTA
and therefore the Special Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear the case pending before it. ... Constitution and therefore the Special Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear the case pending before it. ... 24 of the Cotton Textiles Control Order, 1948 read with Notification No. ... hearing criminal charges against the petitioners to show cause why the records of the case should not be transferred to this Court ... #HL....
2003 0 Supreme(Ori) 242 • India - Orissa
L.MOHAPATRA
457 - Division Bench decision of the Court held that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to entertain the application under Section ... Finding of the Court: The Court set aside the judgment and order of the Sessions Judge, holding that the Magistrate ... Case was allowed. ... Case No. 170 of 2002 corresponding to G. R. case No. 319 of....
1937 0 Supreme(Mad) 325 • India - Madras
Issues: Provision for marriage expenses, liability to pay interest on mesne profits, rate of interest, allowance for land ... It upheld the award of interest on mesne profits, dismissed the claim for allowance of land revenue, and assessed mesne profits based ... Final Decision: The appeal failed except for the provision for marriage expenses, which was varied. ... interest fixed, namely, 7 1/2 pe....
2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3842 • India - Patna High Court
Purnendu Singh, J
Case No. 319 of 2024. ... The judgment pertains to Criminal Miscellaneous No.52580 of 2025 where the petitioner sought pre-arrest bail in connection with Ishakchak ... The court opined that the petitioner, having a clean antecedent, should be granted pre-arrest bail subject to conditions, ruling ... Case No. 319 of 2024 registered under Sections 137(2), 96 and 3....
2008 0 Supreme(SC) 2014 • India - Supreme Court
S.H.KAPADIA, B.SUDERSHAN REDDY
Fact of the Case: The Department filed a Civil Appeal against the judgment and Order of the Gujarat High Court in Tax ... for allowance of deduction for depreciation. ... Final Decision: Civil Appeal filed by the Department stands dismissed. Question of law is kept open. ... This Civil Appeal#HL_END....
1964 0 Supreme(Mad) 37 • India - Madras
S.RAMACHANDRA.IYER, K.SRINIVASAN
Income-tax Act, 1922-Sections 23-A, 28(1)(c) -Claim for allowance of amount alleged to be trading loss finally imposed for furnishing ... When the matter came before this Court under section 66 (2) of the Act, this Court observed that the transactions had been found ... Tribunal referred the following question for the determination of this Court: ... “Whether the sum of Rs. 2,12,....
1979 0 Supreme(All) 613 • India - Allahabad
C.S.P.SINGH, R.R.RASTOGI
The Tribunal was directed to dispose of the appeal in the light of the observations made in the judgment. ... INCOME TAX - DEVELOPMENT REBATE - COMPANY SUCCEEDING TO BUSINESS OF FIRM - CONDITIONS FOR ALLOWANCE OF DEVELOPMENT REBATE - SECTION ... Finding of the Court: The Tribunal found that the erstwhile partners of the firm, who had become shareholders in the ... THE matter was ....
2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 82680 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF JULY 2019 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1941 FAO.No.319 of 2012 AGAINST THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.2034 OF 2009 IN AS 297/2006 of ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC)-I, KOTTAYAM DATED 20-01-2012 APPELLANT IN FAO/ PETITIONER IN IA:SRI.P.BABU KUMAR R5 & R6 SRI.HARISH GOPINATH ADDL.R7 & R8 SRI.M.S.KALESH ADDL.R7 & R8 SRI.P.YADHU KUMAR R5 & R6 SRI.R.S.KALKURA THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01.07.2019, ALONG WITH FAO.#....
2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 82681 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF JULY 2019 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1941 FAO.No.319 of 2012 AGAINST THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.2034 OF 2009 IN AS 297/2006 of ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC)-I, KOTTAYAM DATED 20-01-2012 APPELLANT IN FAO/ PETITIONER IN IA:SRI.P.BABU KUMAR R5 & R6 SRI.HARISH GOPINATH ADDL.R7 & R8 SRI.M.S.KALESH ADDL.R7 & R8 SRI.P.YADHU KUMAR R5 & R6 SRI.R.S.KALKURA THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01.07.2019, ALONG WITH FAO.#....
2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2296 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
EASWARAN S.
(C) No.3176/2012 was filed and as against the order refusing to restore the appeal FAO No.319/2012 was filed. ... The appellant is not a party to the suit, but, however, was impleaded as additional 3rd appellant before the Lower Appellate Court pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in FAO No.319 of 2012 and O.P. ... /order/02600006247">2012 KHC 4379 ] and held as follows:-43. ... Per contra, Shri.R.S #HL_STAR....
2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 92424 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Since the pleadings have been completed in these case, the court below shall allow the parties to complete pre-trial steps, if any, in two months and dispose of the case within a period of six months from today. For the aforementioned reasons, we set aside the orders impugned in these appeals. ... THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.09.2019, ALONG WITH FAO.139/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRE....
2015 Supreme(Online)(KER) 12216 • India - High Court of Kerala
When the case was posted for payment of balance court fee, the defendants applied stating that they MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/25TH JYAISHTA, 1937 FAO.No ... position:absolute;white-space:pre;margin:0;padding:0;top:643pt;left:125pt"> BY ADV.SRI.R.S.KALKURA ... white-space:pre;margin:0;padding:0;top:86pt;left:295pt">2 that this is an eminently fit case ... . 71 of 2012 () ---------------------- <span
Filter by Legal Phrase
