Kerala Court December 2007 Judgments

K.A. Philip and anr. Vs. the Returning Officer and anr.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(1)KLJ254

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The Registrar appointed a Returning Officer to conduct election to the committee of the society in question, acting on the resolution of 7-6-2007, by the committee then in office, to conduct elections on 11 -08-2007. Following due procedure, the polling commenced at 9 a. m. on 11 -08-2007. It is stated that during the course of polling, smoke emanated from a ballot box in one among the four polling booths. Following this, the Returning Officer stopped the polling in all the booths; opened that ballot box, defused the smoking element and handed over the ballot papers and the ballot boxes under proper seal to the Secretary of the society.2. The President of the society and the Board of Directors then in office, filed this writ petition on 16-8-2007, seeking a direction that the polling should continue from the stage at which it was stopped on 11-8-2007. A declaration that the committee then in office is entitled to continue till the election process is c...

Raveendran Vs. Sobhana and anr.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2008Ker145

Kurian Joseph, J.1. What is the jurisdictional obligation of the Court in dealing with a suit or other proceedings by or against persons of unsound mind or persons suffering from any mental infirmity by reason of which they are incapable of protecting their interests, is the question arising for consideration in this case.2. The appeal is directed against the order dated 16-5-2006 in O.P. No. 847/2000 on the file of the Family Court, Thrissur. Appellant is the petitioner. Appellant and the first respondent got married on 20-10-1984 and there is a child in their wedlock. Appellant submits that he is deaf and dumb, and hence the appeal is filed through his mother. The suit is for setting aside the order in M.C. 231/99. The Family Court framed an is sue as to whether the suit for declaration that the order in M.C. 231/99 is null and void, is maintainable.3. M.C. 231/99 is filed by the respondents wife and child herein for maintenance. In the said case, the appellant herein is not represen...

The Asst.Engineer, KwA., Karamana Sub Division, Thiruvananthapuram and ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated:7..2..2003 of the CDRF, Trivandrum in OP:254/01. The complaint in the OP was filed for getting Ext.P2 billdated:16..4..2001 cancelled and also for compensation and cost. The said complaint was preferred by the respondent herein as complainant against the appellants as opposite parties. The lower forum accepted the case of the complainant and thereby P2 bill dated:16..4..2001 issued by the opposite parties for a sum of Rs.22,963/- was cancelled and a sum of Rs.3000/- was ordered as compensation with a cost of Rs.1000/-. Aggrieved by the said order the present appeal is preferred. 2. Notice was issued to the counsel for the appellant and the same was served; but there was no representation from the side of the appellants/opposite parties. Counsel for the respondent present, she vehemently argued for the dismissal of the present appeal. She also supported the findings and conclusions of the lower fo...