Kerala Court April 2008 Judgments

The Manager, State Bank of Travancore, M.G.M.High School Branch, Thiru ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU:PRESIDENT The appellants are 1st and 2nd opposite parties in OP No.168/99 in the file of CDRF, Pathanamthitta. The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as costs. The appellants has sought for setting aside the above order contenting that the complainant cannot be treated as a consumer. 2. It is the case of the complainant who was receiving the Defence Family Pension that on account of the negligence of the opposite parties, for about one and half years she could not receive the family pension. She was residing at Coimbatore and was receiving the family pension. Later she shifted the residence to Thiruvalla. She intimated the S.B.I Branch, Coimbatore to transfer the pension papers to the concerned branch of the Bank at Thiruvalla. But for a long time she did not receive the pension. Hence she approached the High Court and as per order in OP.No.20156/98, the High Court directed the opposite parties to arrang...

The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd. Represented by Its Senior Divisional Ma ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party/insurance company in OP.No.43/02 in the file of CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram and under orders to pay a sum of Rs.41,000/- to the complainant with 9% future interest. 2. The case of the complainant is that the Hero Honda Motor Cycle (Splendor) owned by him and insured with the appellant was stolen on 31.12.2000 when it was parked in front of the house of a friend in between 8.05 pm and 8.20 pm. At the time the vehicle was used by the husband of the complainant. The theft was intimated to the police and the opposite party. After the investigation police filed the UN report. The claim was submitted but got repudiated. 3. The opposite party/appellant has contended that the vehicle was stolen on account of the carelessness and failure to take adequate care by the complainant; as per Clause 4 of the policy ie; Ext.D1. It is stipulated that the insured shall take all reasonable steps to safeguard the Motor Cycle from lo...

Kerala State Electicity Board Rep.by Its Chairman, Thiruvananthapuram ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties/K.S.E.B. which has sought for setting aside the order dated 4.12.2001 in OP.No.38/1997 in the file of CDRF, Wyanad. The appellants has been directed to stall the Revenue Recovery Proceedings for the recovery of Rs.8,777.80 (Rs.5,227.35) and reconnect the electric supply which has been disconnected and dismantled. 2. It is the case of the complainant that he is a consumer under minimum guarantee scheme and that the opposite parties disconnected electric supply on 12/91 and dismantled on 6/96. The opposite parties have claimed the minimum guarantee amount even for period subsequent to the date of disconnection. Hence it is the contention that after disconnection the appellants are not entitled to realize minimum guarantee amount vide, the Revenue Recovery Proceedings. On the other hand the opposite parties have contented that as per the minimum guarantee agreement the complainant is bound to pay the minimu...

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Repd. by Its Deputy Manager Vs. P.B. ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated:3..5..2002 passed by CDRF, Thrissur in OP:89/02. The complaint in the aforesaid original petition was filed by the respondent herein as complainant against the appellant as the 1st opposite party claiming compensation of Rs.4,603/- representing the amount paid to Kerala State Electricity Board on account of damage caused to the electric post owned by KSEB. The appellant/1st opposite party disputed the claim; but the Forum below accepted the case of the complainant by holding that there was deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party/insurance company and by virtue of the impugned order, the appellant/1st opposite party/insurance company is directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,603/- with interest at the rate of 12% and cost of Rs.2000/-. Hence the present appeal by the opposite party/insurance company. 2. When this appeal was taken up for final hearing, there was no representation for the re...

Sosamma Abraham Vs. the Chief Manager, S.B.T. and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2008Ker183; IV(2008)BC233; 2008(2)KLJ93; 2008(2)KLT965

ORDERV. Ramkumar, J.1. The petitioner (Sosamma Abraham) who had availed of a loan of Rs. 15 lakhs from the Kottayam main branch of the State Bank of Travancore for starting a small scale industrial unit in her residential property for the manufacture of cables, seeks to quash Annexure A6 order dated 3-3-2008 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kottayam under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Re-construction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short).2. I heard Adv. Sri. Kuruvila Jacob, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Adv. Sri. Satish Nainan, the learned Counsel appearing for the Bank.THE BORROWER'S PLEA3. Assailing the impugned order Adv. Sri. Kuruvila Jacob, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner made the following submissions:It is true that the petitioner had availed of a loan from the bank for starting a small scale industrial unit in her residential property. But after s...

P.V. Antony Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008CriLJ2898; 2008(2)KLJ257

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. On 6-7-2000, in the last lap of the Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons 1993-2002 the dead body of Ibin Antony, a 20 year old student of the Government Vocational Higher Secondary School for Hearing Impaired, Jagathy, Thiruvananthapuram, was subjected to postmortem by the Police Surgeon and Lecturer in the Department of Forensic Medicine, Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram to conclude that the said person with disabilities of being deaf and dumb died due to extradural bleeding. He was the student of the 2nd Year Vocational Higher Secondary Course.2. The statement filed by the second respondent Commissioner of Police states that on 6-7-2000 at 11.30 a.m., One Ramachandran Nair, the Matron of that school reached the station and informed that Ibin Antony was found in an unconscious condition in his bed in the hostel room and was taken to the General Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram where he was declared dead at 7.55 hours. Following the registration...

Mathew V.D. Vs. State Bank of Travancore

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2008Ker194; 2008(2)KLJ665

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. On 10-12-2004, the respondent Bank obtained a money decree against the petitioner from a civil court. When that decree debt grew beyond Rupees Ten Lakhs, the Bank applied to the Debts Recovery Tribunal Ten Lakhs, the Bank applied to the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 19 and other enabling provisions of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, hereinafter referred to as the RDB Act. It has to be immediately noticed that the Bank did not invoke Section 31A of that Act. With not much of factual disputes, Ext.P6 order was issued by the Tribunal granting recovery certificate in favour of the Bank. That order is challenged as one issued without jurisdiction.2. Before the Tribunal and in this writ petition filed invoking Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the contention of the petitioner is that an application on the strength of a decree of a civil court could be sustained only under Section 31A of the RDB Act and...

Chandramani Traders Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2008)16VST294(Ker)

ORDERH.L. Dattu, C.J.1. In this tax revision case filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T. A. No. 543 of 2002 dated March 20, 2003, for the assessment year 1997-98, the following two questions of law are raised for our consideration and decision/They are:(i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, has not the Appellate Tribunal gone wrong in finding that the revision petitioner is liable to interest with reference to the due date of filing the returns as held by the assessing authority ?(ii) Is not the order of the Tribunal against the decision of the Supreme Court in Maruti Wire Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Sales Tax Officer [2001] 122 STC 410 : [2001] 2 KLT 1002. The questions of law framed by the assessee can be refrained as under : (i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, interest is chargeable under Section 23(3) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 from the date of filing of the return admitting the tax ...

Alleppey Financial Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (2009)222CTR(Ker)199; [2009]313ITR389(Ker); [2009]176TAXMAN1(Ker)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.1. The appellant is a financier whose business premises were searched by the Income-tax Department on 6-1-1997. Even though appellant was an assessee before the Income-tax Officer, Ward II, Alleppey, file was sent to the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Investigation Circle, Kottayam for completing the block assessment pursuant to search under Section 158BC in terms of Annexure-I notification which is issued by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 120 of the Income-tax Act. From the very beginning appellant questioned the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to whom file is sent for assessment. Since he overruled the objection and made assessment, appeal was filed against the same. During the pendency of the appeal, Commissioner of Income-tax suo motu revised the order issued under Section 158BC and directed revision of assessment, against which appellant filed appeal before the Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, the appellant questioned the jurisdic...

The Managing Director Mini Muthootu Nidhi Kerala (Ltd) and Another Vs. ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR: MEMBER The opposite parties in CC.No.393/06 in the file of CDRF, Kollam have preferred this appeal against the order dated 25/1/2007 wherein and whereby the opposite parties are directed to give the pledged gold ornaments to the complainant after receiving the principal amount with interest payable as per the R.B.I. guidelines. They are further directed to pay Rs.3000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as costs. 2. The case of the complainant before the Forum was that he had pledged gold ornaments weighing 44 grams and 28 grams with the 2nd opposite party on 15/9/2004 vide Account No. 7243 and 7244 and availed loan amounts of Rs.20,000/- and Rs.13,000/- respectively. The complainant defaulted in the payment of interest and on 9/6/05 he approached the 2nd opposite party for taking the pledged items. It is the case of the complainant that the opposite parties were reluctant to return the gold ornaments raising one or other reasons. Though the complainant approac...