Kerala Court March 2008 Judgments

E.P.Balakrishnan Vs. K.K.Ashref Mohammed and Others

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal is preferred from the order dated.20.12.02 passed by the CDRF, Kannur in OP.304/99. The appellant herein filed the aforesaid Original Petition against the respondents 1 to 4 as opposite parties claiming compensation of Rs.1,01,269/- on the ground of deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties 1 to 4. The case of the appellant/complainant was that the opposite parties collected excess labour charge @ Rs.50/- per point; that the agreed labour charge was @ Rs.22/- per point; that the wiring work was done by the electricians who was not having wiremen license; that there occurred delay in completing wiring to the residential building of the complainant and thereby caused hardship to the complainant; that the opposite parties compelled the complainant to purchase the wiring materials from the shop in which they were interested and thereby the complainant sustained financial loss. It is also alleged that due deficiency of serv...

United Timber Corporation Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2008)16VST19(Ker)

H.L. Dattu, C.J.1. This revision petition is filed against the orders passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T.A. No. 290/06 dated May 28, 2007. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has directed the assessing authority to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, after verifying the correctness or otherwise of the form 18 declaration produced by the assessee for the purpose of claiming certain exemption in the conceded total and taxable turnover.2. The brief facts are:The petitioner is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (for short, 'the KGST Act'). It is engaged in the import and sale of timber logs. For the assessment year 2003-04, the petitioner had filed its annual returns under the provisions of the KGST Act.3. When the assessing authority had taken up the assessment proceedings, the assessee had produced books of account. The assessing authority after rejecting the books of account had issued a notice, proposing to reject the ...

Kuttookaran Machine Tools Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax and ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: [2009]313ITR413(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Heard Sri P. Balachandran, senior counsel appearing for the assessee and Sri P.K.R. Menon, senior standing counsel appearing for the Revenue. The question raised in the appeal is whether the Tribunal is justified in confirming the penalty levied on the assessee under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1989-90. On going through the Tribunal's order and after hearing counsel, we find that the assessee made bogus claims of investment allowance and depreciation in respect of machinery which were not purchased, installed or commissioned during the previous year. The assessee has no case that it had in fact purchased and installed the machinery in respect of which benefits were claimed under the statute. On the other hand, the assessee's case is that this is a mistake committed by the auditor and so much so the assessee is not liable to be subjected to penalty. In support of his contention, counsel also relied on the decision of the S...

The Administrative Officer, M/S.V.S.M Hospital, Thattarambalam, Maveli ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. M.V. VISWANANTHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is directed against the order dated.28.6.05 passed by the CDRF, Alappuzha in OP.A.5/04. The complaint in the aforesaid Original Petition was filed by the respondent herein as complainant against the appellant as opposite party claiming refund of the amount collected by the opposite party, hospital with compensation of Rs.25.000/-, on the ground of deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The alleged case of deficiency of service and unnecessary collection of amount by way of medical bill was denied by the opposite party. But the forum below on an appreciation of the evidence available on record accepted the case of the complainant to certain extent and thereby the opposite party is directed to refund a sum of Rs.1899/- which was collected unnecessarily. The opposite party was also directed to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- as compensation with cost of Rs.400/-. The opposite party was further directed to pay the aforesaid...

The Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. K.S.Cyriac, Ad ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI.S.CHANDRA MOHAN NAIR : MEMBER 1. The opposite party in O.P.No.158/03 of CDRF, Idukki has come up in this appeal assailing the order dated 4.11.2003 were by the opposite party was directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.6,000/- towards lawful compensation as per the policy for the period from 26.12.2002 to 16.1.2003 and also Rs.3,000/- by way of compensation for deficiency in service and cost of the petition. 2. The facts bereft of unnecessary details in the complaint are that the complainant who is an advocate by profession took a personal accident insurance policy from the opposite party which would expire on 25.8.2003. On 26.12.2002 he fell down and sustained fracture to the left palm. The complainant was treated at Janatha Clinic, Thodupuzha and his left hand was under plaster till 16.1.2003. He was having pain for one and half months. As the claim made to the opposite party was repudiated the complaint was filed praying for directions to the opposite party to pay a sum ...

Assistant Manager, Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. and Another ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SMT. VALSALA SARANGADHARAN: MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated.11.5.04 passed by the CDRF, Alappuzha in OP.No.205/03. The complaint was filed by the respondent herein as complainant against the appellants as opposite parties. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant joined the chitty conducted by the appellant, KSFE on 7.5.99. On 16.8.01 the complainant submitted the NCL loan application for an amount of Rs.95,000/-. The loan was sanctioned and the opposite parties told the complainant to remit documentation charges. Only Rs.94250/- was given as loan amount to the complainant instead of Rs.95,000/- and on 10.7.03 the 51st instalment of the chitty was prized in favour of the complainant. As the title deeds were pledged with the opposite parties, the complainant had produced encumbrance certificate on 14.7.03 and again on 28.7.03. Opposite parties asked the complainant to remit interest for a period of 15 days at the rate of 16% for Rs.1,40,...

The Asst.Ex.Engineer, Electrical Major Section, K.S.E.B., Kodakara, Th ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER No representation for the appellants. Respondent appeared in person. He is coming from Chalakudy. Appellants are called absent. Hence the appeal is dismissed for default....

Remya Raju and ors. Vs. Govt. of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2008Ker192; 2008(2)KLJ216

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Petitioners 1 & 2 are two students of SDA School, Sadanandapuram, Kottarakkara and are appearing for the SSLC examination of March 2008, conducted by Government of Kerala, which commenced on 12-03-2008. According to them, they belong to the Seventh Day Adventist denomination, a world wide Protestant Christian denomination and are therefore entitled to fundamental right under Article 25(1) of the Constitution to freely profess, practise and propagate that religion. According to them, in terms of the core faith of the members of that denomination, they have to abstain from any activity from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturdays and therefore it will be impermissible for them, in the context of their religion, to appear for the examination scheduled tomorrow, i.e., 15-03-2008/fliey filed this Writ Petition on 12-03-2008, relying on Ext.P2 Government Order dt. 21-12-1961 by which the Government had decided that if there are any candidates belonging to Jews or Seve...

M.S. Viswambharan Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Kerala

Reported in: [2009]310ITR181(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and senior standing counsel appearing 'for the respondents. The petitioner applied for settlement of income-tax liability for the year 1982-83 under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme of 1998. The proceedings issued, vide exhibit P5, show that liability due for 1982-83 was only interest payable under various provisions of the Income-tax Act and the petitioner was allowed to settle the liability by paying 50 per cent, in terms of the Scheme. However, the petitioner's case is that there was balance tax liability for 1982-83 and if that was reckoned the petitioner would have been able to settle the liability by paying 30 per cent, of the total disputed income to which balance tax is attributable. However, the Department's case is that tax liability of Rs. 87,232 got adjusted from refund due for 1984-85 as is evident from the exhibit P3 proceedings. The petitioner's counsel contended that adjustment under Section 155 is made without ...

Bpl Us West Cellular Ltd. and Another Vs. C.H. Shamsudeen

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER No representation for the appellants and respondents. On the last hearing date also there was no representation from either side. Appellants are called absent. Hence appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution....