Santhosh Kumar and Others Vs. N. Vijayan @ Vijayan Pillai and Another

Santhosh Kumar and Others vs N. Vijayan @ Vijayan Pillai and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram Decided Aug 21, 2008

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1111790

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1111790
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Judge: Justice Sri. K.R. Udayabhanu: President, Smt. Valsala Sarangadharan: Member
Decided On: Aug 21, 2008
Case Number: APPEAL No. 1 of 2008
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

Santhosh Kumar and Others

Respondent

N. Vijayan @ Vijayan Pillai and Another

Excerpt

justice sri. k.r. udayabhanu : president the appellants are the opposite parties 1 to 3 the then office bearers of the 4th opposite party all the opposite parties are under orders to pay a sum of rs.87,000/- with 12% interest from 4.6.06 and also to pay compensation of rs.2000/- and cost of rs.1000/-. 2. it is the case of the complainant that he remitted a sum of rs.87,000/-in the investment scheme of the opposite parties, in various instalments. it is his complaint that the amounts were not returned with interest on the due date. 3. the opposite parties were ex parte in the proceedings before the forum. it is their case herein that the counsel did not inform them of the posting dates. the complainant had filed proof affidavit and ext.a1 to a4 series of documents were marked. 4. it is the case of the appellants herein that they are not the office bearers right now and that the office bearers at the time of the filing the complaint were not impleaded. their grievance is confined to the fact that they are also liable to be pay jointly and severally along with 4th respondent institution represented by its secretary. we find that the appellants cannot be totally absolved of liability as it appears that the scheme was lodged perhaps at the time when they were the office bearers. as agreed to by counsel appearing for both sides the order of the forum is modified to the effect that the execution is to be initiated at first against 4th opposite party and only in case the amount could not be realised the proceedings are to be launched against the appellants. with the above modifications the order of the forum is sustained. appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Full Judgment

JUSTICE SRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT

The appellants are the opposite parties 1 to 3 the then office bearers of the 4th opposite party All the opposite parties are under orders to pay a sum of Rs.87,000/- with 12% interest from 4.6.06 and also to pay compensation of Rs.2000/- and cost of Rs.1000/-.

2. It is the case of the complainant that he remitted a sum of Rs.87,000/-in the Investment Scheme of the opposite parties, in various instalments. It is his complaint that the amounts were not returned with interest on the due date.

3. The opposite parties were ex parte in the proceedings before the Forum. It is their case herein that the counsel did not inform them of the posting dates. The complainant had filed proof affidavit and Ext.A1 to A4 series of documents were marked.

4. It is the case of the appellants herein that they are not the office bearers right now and that the office bearers at the time of the filing the complaint were not impleaded. Their grievance is confined to the fact that they are also liable to be pay jointly and severally along with 4th respondent institution represented by its Secretary. We find that the appellants cannot be totally absolved of liability as it appears that the scheme was lodged perhaps at the time when they were the office bearers.

As agreed to by counsel appearing for both sides the order of the Forum is modified to the effect that the execution is to be initiated at first against 4th opposite party and only in case the amount could not be realised the proceedings are to be launched against the appellants. With the above modifications the order of the Forum is sustained.

Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Same Court & Year Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thi... Same Parties Santhosh Kumar and Others vs N. Vijayan @ Vijayan Pillai and ... Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Justice Sri. K.R. Udayabhanu: President, Smt. Valsala Saranga...