Kerala Court August 2009 Judgments

Assistant Executive Engineer, P.H. Sub Division, Kerala Water Authorit ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party/Water Authority in OP.49/05 in the file of CDRF, Kottayam. The bill issued by the opposite party for a sum of Rs.6332/- stands cancelled and the opposite party/appellant is also directed to pay cost of Rs.500/-. 2. The complainant has sought for setting aside the impugned bill on the ground that has been levied with commercial tariff whereas according to him he is liable to pay the rates under domestic tariff. The Forum has up-held the contention of the complainant that he was not using water supply by the appellant for commercial purposes. The counsel for the appellant has pointed out that setting aside the bill as such is not proper as the appellant has got every right to levy the bill at least under the domestic tariff. 3. We find that the counsel for the appellant is perfectly correct. In the circumstances, the order of the Forum is set aside. The appellant is directed to issue bill for the water consumed un...

Assistant Secretary, Electrical Sections, Thrissur Corporation and Ano ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is directed against the order dated 7th March 2007 of the CDRF, Thrissur in CC 1124/06. The complaint in the aforesaid consumer complaint was preferred by the 1st respondent herein as complainant against the appellants and the 2nd respondents as opposite party 1 to 3 respectively. The said complaint was filed to get the P1 demand notice dated 1.12.06 issued by the opposite party Thrissur Corporation cancelled and to prevent the opposite parties from taking any coercive steps against the complainant to realize the arrears of electricity charges claimed in Ext.P1 demand notice. The complainant has also alleged deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in issuing the P1 demand notice. It is further alleged that the said claim is barred by limitation and that the complainant has not consumed any electrical energy with respect to the consumer No.7626-C with effect from 14.2.03. The opposite parties entered appearance an...

Sri.Babu Varghese Vs. the Branch Manager, New India Assurance Co.Ltd. ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR, MEMBER: It is aggrieved by the dismissal of the complaint in CC.498/06 of CDRF, Ernakulam that the present appeal is filed by the complainant calling for the interference of this Commission as to the sustainability of the order passed by the Forum below. 2. The Complaint has approached the Forum alleging that he was not given the amount claimed by him towards the repair charges consequent to an accident to his vehicle, which was insured by him with the first opposite party. It is also his case that the policy was taken during the period from 23.3.06 to 22.3.07 and that it was during the validity of the policy that the accident happened and even though he had spent Rs.40,100/- towards the repair charges and Rs.2000/- towards towing charges, the first opposite party had paid him only a sum of Rs.23,800/- for the reason that there was policy violation as his vehicle was fitted with a LPG kit also. The opposite parties ought to have paid him the total amount of ...

Kerala Builders Forum and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ228

K. Balakrishnan Nair, J.1. The main point that arises for decision in these cases is the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959, which were introduced by way of an amendment by the Finance Act, 2007 (Act No. 15 of 2007).W.P. (C) No. 17794/07: This writ petition is treated as the main case, for the purpose of referring to the pleadings and exhibits. The brief facts of the case are the following:2. The first petitioner is a Society, registered under the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955. The petitioners 2 to 4 and other builders are its members. The fifth petitioner is a person, who entered into two agreement with the third petitioner, one for the purchase of an undivided share of land owned by the said petitioner and the other for construction of a residential flat. The members of the first petitioner, including petitioners 2 to 4 are engaged in the business of development of properties and constru...

Guruvayur Devaswom and anr. Vs. P.V. Sasidharan and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ222

S.S. Satheesachandran, J.1. The 1st and 2nd respondents in O.S. No. 9 of 2007 on the file of the Munsiffs Magistrate Court, Perinthalmannahave filed this writ petition to issue a writ, order or direction to the court below to consider the maintainability of the suit as a preliminary issue before the trial of the case, quashing Ext. P7 order passed by that Court. Ext. P7 order was passed in an interlocutory application moved by these petitioners as I.A. No. 188 of 2008 requesting the court to consider the maintainability of the suit as a preliminary issue, which after hearing both sides, was dismissed by order dated 21.6.2008.2. The short facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition may be summed up thus: The above suit O.S. No. 9 of 2007 was instituted by the 1st respondent, who claimed to be an ardent devotee of Lord Guruvayurappan, challenging the authority of the 3rd respondent to organise the Poonthanam Sahityolsavam in the plaint property, Poonthanam Illom and its premises, a...

Thalapalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2010Ker6

K. Balakrishnan Nair, J.1. The main point that arises for decision in these appeals is whether the Co-operative Societies, which are the appellants in these cases, are 'public authorities', as defined under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Central Act 22 of 2005). Since the very same point arises in all these appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.W.A. No. 1417/2009:2. This appeal is treated as the main case for the purpose of referring to the exhibits. The appellant was the writ petitioner. It was a service co-operative bank registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The brief facts of the case are the following:The Registrar of Co-operative Societies issued Ext. P1 Circular No. 23 of 2006 dated 1-6-2006 to all Co-operative Societies like the appellant, stating that all Co-operative Societies under the control of Registrar of Co-operative Societies are public authorities under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereina...

Abdul Razack Vs. State of Kerala

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009CriLJ4705; 2009(3)KLJ343

Balakrishnan Nair, J.1. The appellant, feeling aggrieved by his conviction and the sentence imposed on him in Sessions Case No. 262/01 on the files of the Court of Sessions, Manjeri, has preferred this Criminal Appeal. The case against the appellant was as follows:The appellant was residing with his wife Rasiya and two children in a rented building bearing Door No. 7/87 of Edakara Grama Panchayat. On the fateful day, there was a quarrel between the husband and wife and this led to the appellant pouring kerosene over Rasiya and setting fire to her at about 10 p.m. She Was taken to the nearby hospital at Nilambur and from there to the Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode. While undergoing treatment, she breathed her last on 2.9.1997. Based on the F.I. Statement given by the deceased and the dying declaration made before the learned Magistrate, the police charge-sheeted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC). The Judicial First C...

The Manager, Thrissur District Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. K.P.Govindan ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties in CC.193/07 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur. The appellants are under orders to refund the excess amount collected from the complainant and also to pay cost of Rs.1000/-. The case of the complainant is that the opposite parties have collected excess amounts towards interest with respect to the housing loan availed by the complainant from the opposite parties. The opposite parties/appellants stood ex-parte before the Forum. We find that the order is not a considered one. In the circumstance, the order of the Forum is set aside on condition that the appellants/opposite parties remit a sum of Rs.3,000/- towards costs of the complainant or pay the same to the complainant.On deposit of the amount which can be withdrawn by the complainant or on payment the Forum will issue notice to the complainant and permit the opposite party to file version and contest the matter. The case stands posted before the Forum on 30.9.0...

Nattakam Suresh Vs. the Kerala State Election Commission and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ482

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. While the President of a Grama Panchayat, the petitioner was ousted from ttiat office by the carrying of a motion of no-confidence. He, thereupon, filed two petitions under Section 4 of the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1999 (for short, the 'Anti Defection Act') before the Kerala State Election Commission seeking declaration that the two members, who moved and seconded the no-confidence motion against him, had given up their membership of the political party to which they belong and had accordingly defected. He also filed two interlocutory applications before the Commission seeking to interdict those persons from taking part in the meetings of tie Panchayat, voting or contesting to any official post in ttiat Panchayat.2. On the allegation that re-election to the post of President is likely to be held; the petitioner seeks a direction to the Commission to issue interlocutory order restraining the participation of the aforesaid...

The Ta-aleemul Islam Trust and ors. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(3)KLJ496

P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.1. The common issue involved in all these cases is whether any contribution is liable to be paid in respect of the persons who have crossed the age of 60 years and are operating their own vehicles, on the basis of the valid driving licence and badge as 'self employed' persons under The Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Act ('Act' in short) and whether the Taxation Officer under the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act is justified in refusing to accept the tax insisting that such persons also will have to produce requisite 'Certificates' as envisaged under Section 8A of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Act. It is also an Issue, whether the persons engaged for operating the Motor vehicles belonging to the 'Educational Institutions' are to be treated differently and whether any contribution is liable to be paid under the above enactment in respect of them as well.2. The liability to effect contribution in respect of the 'employees' of th...