Skip to content

Kerala Court March 2008 Judgments

Browse smarter

Open an 18-section brief on any judgment

Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.

  • AI Brief & Ask
  • Semantic AI Search
  • Devil's Bench

Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.

Mar 03 2008

K.V.Sasi Vs. V.A. Sukumaran and Others

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on: Mar-03-2008

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT Although notice was served on the appellant who had filed the appeal in person there is no representation. Hence the Appeal is dismissed for default....


Mar 03 2008

O.V.Dennies Vs. M/S.Ponneth Construction, Rep.by Its Proprietor, P.A.S ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on: Mar-03-2008

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT Although notice was served on the Counsel for the appellant there is no representation. Hence the appeal is dismissed for default. ...


Mar 01 2008

The Secretary, Keralastate Electricity Board, Vaidyuthi Bhavan, Pattom ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on: Mar-01-2008

SHRI.S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR : MEMBER The opposite parties in OP:1/03 before the CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram have come up in appeal assailing the order dated:31..3..2005 wherein and whereby the opposite parties are directed to repay Rs.3595/- to the complainant within 2 months from the date of order failing which the said amount will carry interest at the rate of 9% till the date of payment. 2.The case of the complainant bereft of unnecessary details in the complaint is that he is a consumer of the opposite parties and that he has taken the electricity connection as single phase and on 30..1..1997 he requested to convert the same to 3 phase. As the complainant noticed that the meter was defective he made a further request to the 3rd opposite party to replace the same and on 5..5..2000 the meter was replaced. But that was also defective and it was replaced on 16..5..2000. The complainant alleges that he had been paying electricity charges based on a defective meter and as the meter was replac...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial