Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Jayakrishnan and Another Vs. K.R. Rajesh and Another

Jayakrishnan and Another vs K.R. Rajesh and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram Decided Mar 01, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1108347

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
First Appeal No. A/11/360 (Arisen out of Order Dated 25/06/2010 in Case No. CC/09/130 of District Alappuzha)
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jayakrishnan and Another

Respondent

K.R. Rajesh and Another

Excerpt

justice sri. k.r. udayabhanu : president the appellants are the opposite parties in cc.130/09 in the file of cdrf, alapuzha. the appellants are under orders to pay a sum of rs.50000/- the amount required for getting the vehicle repaired and compensation of rs.10000/-. 2. the case of the complainant is that he purchased a pre-owned car from the opposite parties with a maruti true value certification for a sum of rs.2,43,500/-. according to him the vehicle was having serious problems thereafter. 3. the opposite parties have filed version contending that whatever repairs required were done. subsequently the complainant took the vehicle to m/s popular vehicle and services ltd. it is alleged that the complainant has used the car in a careless manner. 4. the evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of pw1, rw1; exts.a1 to a12 and b1 to b5. 5. we find that the forum has disposed of the matter by a cryptic order without considering the evidence adduced. moreover there is no expert evidence in the matter also. in the circumstances the order of the forum is set aside. the matter is remitted back to forum. forum is directed to disposed of the matter on merits for affording an opportunity to both sides to adduce any further evidence if they so desire. 6. the matter stands posted before the forum on 18.4.2012. office will forward the lcr alongwith the copy of this order to the forum.

Full Judgment

JUSTICE SRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT

The appellants are the opposite parties in CC.130/09 in the file of CDRF, Alapuzha. The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs.50000/- the amount required for getting the vehicle repaired and compensation of Rs.10000/-.

2. The case of the complainant is that he purchased a pre-owned car from the opposite parties with a Maruti True Value certification for a sum of Rs.2,43,500/-. According to him the vehicle was having serious problems thereafter.

3. The opposite parties have filed version contending that whatever repairs required were done. Subsequently the complainant took the vehicle to M/s Popular Vehicle and Services Ltd. It is alleged that the complainant has used the car in a careless manner.

4. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of PW1, RW1; Exts.A1 to A12 and B1 to B5.

5. We find that the Forum has disposed of the matter by a cryptic order without considering the evidence adduced. Moreover there is no expert evidence in the matter also. In the circumstances the order of the Forum is set aside. The matter is remitted back to Forum. Forum is directed to disposed of the matter on merits for affording an opportunity to both sides to adduce any further evidence if they so desire.

6. The matter stands posted before the Forum on 18.4.2012.

Office will forward the LCR alongwith the copy of this order to the Forum.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial