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.

C. Krishnakumary Vs. the Asst. Engineer, Kseb, Electrical Major Section, Paravoor and Another

C. Krishnakumary vs The Asst. Engineer, Kseb, Electrical Major Section, Paravoor and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram Decided Apr 20, 2010
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1110479

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/10/166 (Arisen out of order dated 23/01/2010 in Case No. CC 127/07 of District Kollam)
Subject
Consumer

Case Summary

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

Consumer

Key legal issue
Consumer

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

C. Krishnakumary

Respondent

The Asst. Engineer, Kseb, Electrical Major Section, Paravoor and Another

Excerpt

justice shri.k.r.udayabhanu: president the appellant is the complainant in cc:127/07 in the file of cdrf, kollam. the complaint has been dismissed holding that the same is not maintainable as rr proceedings have already been initiated and that rr proceedings started meant that the sovereign functions began and hence the forum has no jurisdiction. 2. we find that the finding of the forum is incorrect. sovereign functions and rr proceedings has no connection. it is the basis for initiating the rr proceedings that has been questioned. hence the finding of the forum is set aside. 3. it is also seen that the entire evidence has been adduced that consisted of the testimony of pw1 to pw3, dw1,ext.p1 and ext.d1. 4. the forum is directed to dispose of the case on merits. 5. the matter stands posted before the forum on 28/5/2010. the office is directed to forward a copy of this order to the forum urgently.

Full Judgment

JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT

The appellant is the complainant in CC:127/07 in the file of CDRF, Kollam. The complaint has been dismissed holding that the same is not maintainable as RR proceedings have already been initiated and that RR proceedings started meant that the sovereign functions began and hence the Forum has no jurisdiction.

2. We find that the finding of the Forum is incorrect. Sovereign functions and RR proceedings has no connection. It is the basis for initiating the RR proceedings that has been questioned. Hence the finding of the Forum is set aside.

3. It is also seen that the entire evidence has been adduced that consisted of the testimony of PW1 to PW3, DW1,Ext.P1 and Ext.D1.

4. The Forum is directed to dispose of the case on merits.

5. The matter stands posted before the Forum on 28/5/2010.

The office is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Forum urgently.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial