Kerala Court October 2008 Judgments

The Manager, M/S. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. A.N.Jaladambika and ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT The appellant is the second opposite party /insurer in OP.435/02. The appellant is under orders to pay the claim amount of Rs.1 lakh with interest at 9% from 7.12.02 till the date of filing and also to pay cost of Rs.1000/-. 2. It is the case of the complainants who are the wife and minor children of the late Venugopalan Nair, that the above venugopalan Nair died on 12.2.01 in a train accident. He was a member of the insurance scheme promoted by the first opposite party Malayala Manorama. After investigation a final report was filed mentioning that the death was the result of suicide. The first petitioner then filed a petition before the Superintendent of Police, Kottayam for re-investigation. On re-investigation as per final report filed on 5.2.02 by the Circle Inspector of Police, Changanassery the finding is that Venugopalan Nair died in an accident. The claim was repudiated by the appellant on the ground that Venugopalan Nair committed suici...

The Managing Director, Kerala State Co-operative Consumer Federation V ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties in CC.186/07 in the file of CDRF, Alappuzha. The appellants/Consumer Fed and the concerned Co-operative Society are under orders to refund a sum of Rs.5750/- and also to pay compensation of Rs.5000/- to the complainant and also to pay cost of Rs.1000/-. The appellants were exparte in the proceedings before the Forum. In the circumstances the order of the Forum is set aside on condition that the appellants would pay a sum of Rs.1000/- towards cost to the complainant or remit the sum before the Forum which can be withdrawn by the complainant. The Forum will afford opportunity to the opposite parties to file version and adduce evidence and dispose of the matter on merits. The case shall stand posted before the Forum on 10..12..2008. Office is directed to dispatch the order to the Forum urgently....

Branch Manager, Regional Agro Industrial Development Co-operative of K ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI. KR. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties in CC.76/2007 in the file of CDRF, Wayanadu Kalpetta. The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant society. 2. It is the case of the complainant society that they purchased a power tiller and trailer from the appellant availing a loan of Rs.1,00,000/- from the Canara Bank branch and also collecting amounts from the members of the society. The entire amount was paid on 15..3..2005. The tiller and trailer were delivered on 13..4..2005. But the opposite party/appellant obtained the registration of the vehicle from the RTO office only on 16..6..2005. It is the case that the tiller and trailer could not be used for the above period which was the agricultural season for ploughing. On account of the delay in getting registration they could not use the tiller at all for the particular season. The use of the equipment is confined to the particular season of the year ...

Managing Committee of Kandalloor Farmers Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. Vs. ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(3)KLJ742

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. These writ petitions are by the managing committee of a Co-operative Bank. That committee was superseded as per order dated 20-2-2008 which is marked Ext.P11 in WP(C).7339/2008. WP(C).4661/2008 was filed challenging the notice dated 29-1-2008 issued under Section 32(1) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. That document is Ext.P4 in WP(C).7339/2008. Noticing the different contentions in WP(C).4661/2008, an interim order was issued on 8-2-2008 in that case. It was thereafter that the order impugned in WP(C).7339/2008, Ext.P11 therein, was issued by the Joint Registrar exercising the powers of the Registrar. The implementation and all further proceedings pursuant to that order stand stayed as per interim order dated 3-3-2008 granted at the stage of admission of WP(C).7339/2008.2. Having regard to the pleadings, materials and the issued arising for decision, these writ petitions are heard jointly and are bei...

Babu Oomen Thomas (Dr.) Vs. State of Kerala and anr.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(1)KLJ54

K.M. Joseph, J.1. Petitioner in this Writ Petition (hereinafter referred to as Dr. Babu), seeks a declaration that the Ordinance issued as 'The Kerala Temporary Stay of Eviction Proceedings Ordinance, 2006' (Ordinance No. 41 of 2006) and the Kerala Temporary Stay of Eviction Proceedings Ordinance, 2006 (Ordinance No. 52 of 2006) and the Kerala Temporary Stay of Eviction Proceedings Ordinance, 2007 (Ordinance No. 14 of 2007) and the Kerala Temporary Stay of Eviction Proceedings Ordinance, 2007 (Ordinance No. 40 of 2007) and the Kerala Temporary Stay of Eviction Proceedings Act, 2007 (Act No. 14 of 2007) are invalid, void and non-est and ultra vires of the powers of the 1st respondent by issuing a writ of certiorari of other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to stay all directions and directives that are being issued by the first respondent and the second respondent to conduct survey and identification of the lands in the possession of various persons as a pr...

Haseena T.A. Vs. the Kerala Public Service Commission and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(3)KLJ813; 2009(2)SLJ167(Kerala)

Kurian Joseph, J.1. Whether the cancellation of an advice by the Public Service Commission made against the reservation turn will forfeit the claim of a candidate for advice against the open competition turn is the crucial question arising for consideration in this case. Petitioner is serial No. 817 in the ranked list published by the Public Service Commission for appointment to the post of Last Grade Servants in various departments in Ernakulam District. The ranked list was published on 29-1-2004. She was advised for appointment to the post in the reservation turn of Muslim in the Judicial Department. Ext.P1 is the advice memo dated 23-5-2005. It is specifically noted in the advice memo that the appointment is against the reservation turn. Accordingly the District Judge, Ernakulam, the appointing authority, issued Ext.P2 proceedings appointing the petitioner as Peon in the Additional District Court, Ernakulam. However, the petitioner was not permitted to join duty on the ground that s...

Bhima and Brother Vs. Assistant Commissioner (Assmt), Commercial Taxes ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2009)21VST31(Ker)

K.M. Joseph, J.1. The question that falls for decision in this case is the true scope of Explanation 5 to Section 8(f) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 which reads as follows:Explanation 5.-Where a dealer opens a new branch in the current year, the additional compounded tax payable under this clause in respect of such branch shall be the average of the tax payable by him in respect of his principal place of business and all branches. Such dealers will be permitted to continue to pay compounded tax under this clause even if they do not opt for paying tax under this clause for the new branch.2. Section 8(1) stands substituted with effect from April 1, 2008. According to the petitioner, the said Explanation is inapplicable to the petitioner. In order to appreciate the contentions of the petitioner it is necessary to advert to the following facts:The petitioner is a registered dealer in gold and silver ornaments under the KVAT Act (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act'). It has its ...

K.R. Subramanian Vs. Official Liquidator, High Court of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: [2009]147CompCas213(Ker)

J.B. Koshy, J.1. Company Appeal No. 30 of 2003 is filed by the first accused in Criminal Complaint No. 4 of 2001 in Company Petition No. 41 of 1999. He was convicted by the impugned judgment of the company court and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000. Company Appeal No. 29 of 2003 is filed by the second accused. He was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000. Company Appeal No. 33 of 2003 was filed by accused Nos. 3, 4 and 5 in the above criminal complaint. They were also convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000 each. All of them were charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Section 454(5) of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act').2. M/s. Kanippayyur Hire Purchase Co. P. Ltd., was incorporated on December 7, 1976, under the Indian Companies Act. The company went into liquidation and the liquidator of the company was appointed on January 25, 2002, in C. P. No. 41 of 1999. The complainant issued n...

M.V. Ganesh, Lr of Late M.S. Viswambharan Vs. Commissioner of Income T ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2009)221CTR(Ker)83; [2009]310ITR183(Ker); [2009]181TAXMAN227(Ker)

H.L. Dattu, C.J.1. Appellant before us is the legal representative of late M.S. Viswambharan. During his lifetime, Viswambharan had called in question Exhibit P5 order passed by the Designated Authority under a scheme, known as 'Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998'. The other relief that was sought in the writ petition was to quash Exhibit P3 order passed by the assessing authority for the asst. yr. 1984-85 in exercise of his powers under Section 155 of the IT Act, 1961 ('IT Act' for short). The last relief that was sought was to direct the first respondent, viz., the Designated Authority, to pass fresh orders on Exhibit P4 declaration in accordance with the provisions of Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, treating the petitioner as an assessee in default of payment of tax as if no adjustment of refund is made towards the demand for the asst. yr. 1982-83.2. Late Viswambharan was an assessee under the provisions of the IT Act. He is borne on the files of the 2nd respondent. The assessing auth...

Viswambaran Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2009Ker53; 2008(3)KLJ687

V. Giri, J.1. Petitioner operated a regular stage carriage on the route Moonupeedia - Anapuzha in Thrissur District. As per Ext. P1, permit was valid up to 16-4-2007. Petitioner submitted an application for replacement of his existing vehicle. The said application was rejected by the second respondent as per Ext.P3 order on the premise that the vehicle which was sought to be replaced is a later model vehicle than the vehicle which is offered for replacement. Ext.P3 has been challenged in this writ petition.2. I do not propose to consider the correctness of the reasons contained in Ext.P3. The only question to be considered is whether Ext.P3 order is passed by an authority who has jurisdiction to do so. Section 83 of the Motor Vehicle Act reads as follows:Replacement of vehicle: The holder of a permit may, with the permission of the authority by which permit was granted, replace any vehicle covered by the permit by any other vehicle of the same nature.As per Rule 174(1) of the Motor Veh...