Kerala Court October 2010 Judgments

The Regional Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd. and Others V ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER The appeal preferred from the order dated 30th March 2009 of the CDRF, Alappuzha in CC No. 27/2008. 2.The appellants were the opposite parties and respondent was the complainant in CC No. 27/2008 on the file of CDRF, Alappuzha. The above complaint was filed alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties in repudiating the insurance claim preferred by the complainant with respect to the insured vehicle (Mercedes Benz Car) bearing Reg. No. KL 5 T 5555. The complainant claimed a sum of Rs. 13,97,654.25 towards the repair charge including labour charge and cost of spare parts with respect to the insured vehicle, which was damaged in a road traffic accident. The complainant has also claimed compensation for deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. 3.The opposite parties entered appearance before the Forum below and filed version denying the alleged deficiency of service. They justified their action in repudiating ...

Hyundai Motor India Ltd., Through Its Authorized Signatory A-30. Mohan ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

COMMON JUDGMENT SRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR,MEMBER The first opposite party in CC.120/05 of CDRF, Alappuzha is the appellant in Appeal 62/09 and the second and third opposite parties are the appellants in Appeal 143/09 . Both appeals are preferred against the order dated 30.6.08 directing the opposite parties to take back the vehicle KL-4/N-1048 and to replace a new vehicle of same model with compensation of Rs.10,000/- and cost of Rs.1,000/- within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order. 2. For a fair disposal of both appeals, it is desirable to have a re-capitulation of the facts of the case in brief as here under: 3. The complainant had purchased a Santro Xing vehicle from the third opposite party with the financial assistance of HDFC Bank and got it delivered through the second opposite party on 2.7.03. It is the case of the complainant that the opposite parties, by advertisement in the newspapers, had offered a mileage of 20 k.m. per litre and that after the purchase ...

Parakkad Sree Bhagavathy Devaswom Vs. Malabar Devaswom Board

Court: Kerala

Reported in: ILR2010(4)Ker541

1. This matter relates to the administration of the Parakkad Sree Bhagavathi Devaswom at Kavassery in Alathur Taluk of Palakkad District. It cannot be disputed that the said Devaswom is an autonomous body administered in terms of a scheme framed by the District Court and the control of Malabar Devaswom Board over it, in terms of the provisions of the Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Act, 1951, is only supervisory. One T.P.Murukan was the Manager of the aforesaid Devaswom. When he attained the age of superannuation, he did not hand over charge to any person but continued to hold office. Ultimately, the Assistant Commissioner in the HR & CE (Administration) Department issued Ext.P2 on 20.11.2007, acting on a letter of the Commissioner and also the Devaswom Manager's application for annual increment, ordering that Sri.Murukan shall forthwith surrender charge and custody of all affairs and movable and immovable properties of the temple and such charge will be temporarily taken by S...

United India Insurance Company Ltd., Ponkunnam Branch, R/by Dr. Mohan ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI.M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Kottayam in CC.65/2006 dated:29/08/2009. The appellant is the opposite party who prefers this appeal. The respondent is the complainant in the above OP. 2. The allegation in the complaint put by the complainant that the complainant was the owner of St.George Oil Mills, Erattupetta and this Coconut Oil Mill is situated in a two storied building which consisted of the ground floor and first floor respectively. The ground floor is used for oil extraction where plant and machinery is installed and the ground floor is also used for the storage of copra and coconut oil. Above the ground floor, there is the first floor, there is a small chamber used for heating and drying copra. The complainant has taken a Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy in respect of the oil mill, plant and machinery with Rs.2,00,000/- and stock of copra and coconut oil for Rs.3,00,000/-. The heating chamber is covered under the po...

The Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India and ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI.M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The appellants were the opposite parties 1 and 2 and respondent was the complainant in OP.599/01 on the file of CDRF, Kollam. The complaint in the said OP.No.599/01 was filed alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties 1 and 2 (LIC of India) in repudiating the insurance claim preferred by the complainant as nominee of the life assured, Late Sri.A.Muhammed Mustafa. The opposite parties 1 and 2 entered appearance and filed written version denying the alleged deficiency of service. They contended that the life assured, A.Muhammed Mustafa concealed and suppressed material facts regarding his health condition while submitting the personal statement for getting the lapsed policy revived on 24/6/1999. It was contended that from 1/4/1999 the life assured, A.Muhammed Mustafa was suffering from recurrence of pulmonary Tuberculosis and Diabetes Mellitus and that he underwent treatment as inpatient in Medical College Hospital, Thiruvan...

K.R. Jayaramkumar Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Office, ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI.S. CHANDRA MOHAN NAIR : MEMBER The order dated 27-01-2010 of CDRF, Palakkad in CC No. 06/2009 is being assailed in this appeal by the complainant who is aggrieved by the dismissal of the complaint by the Forum below. 2. The complainant has approached the Forum stating that he had insured his rubber plantations with the first opposite party National Insurance Company and that he had lodged certain claims before the opposite parties which were not entertained and though he was entitled to get the balance amount of the insurance claims, the opposite parties were reluctant and that the complaint was not heeded by the opposite parties. Alleging deficiency of service the complaint was filed before the Forum praying for directions to the opposite parties to pay the claims made by the complainant. 3. The opposite parties filed versions and on an appreciation of the contentions raised by the opposite parties the Forum below dismissed the complaint which was taken up in appeal by the compla...

Krishnankutty Vs. the Manager, Eleston Estate, Kalpetta Post and Anoth ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. S. CHANDRAMOAN NAIR : MEMBER The order dated:29/9/2008 in CC.112/07 of CDRF, Wayanadu is being assailed in this appeal by the complainant who is aggrieved by the dismissal of the complaint by the Forum below. 2. The complainant has approached the Forum stating that though he had handed over the necessary papers showing his year of birth as 1949 in order to receive Employees Provident Fund Pension under the EPS 1995, the 2nd opposite party had rejected his request on the ground that the papers were submitted after retirement of the complainant. It is his case that his date of birth is 1/6/1949 and not 1/6/1947 and that he understood about the mistake only after retirement. The further case put forth by the complainant is that though he had produced the extract of admission register issued by the headmaster where he had studied up to the 4th standard, the 1st opposite party did not take necessary steps to forward the same for enabling him to get the Employees Provident Fund Pension...

M/S. Speed and Safe Courier Services, Rep. by Its Director and Another ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA,MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the forum below in OP.414/03 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur dated 21st February 2005. The respondents are the opposite parties. 2. In short, the complainant alleged some complaint that he sent a parcel to his friend Mr.Suprathim Dutta of Calcutta through the appellants. According to the complainant parcel contained a blood pressure monitor and a G.S mobile phone meant as gifts to his friend that the consignment was hard paper carton tied with a nylon tape and completely covered with white cloth stitched with thread. He paid Rs.112/- towards courier charges. But when the parcel reached the consignee, the packet was not intact, it was opened and it was seeing that the top portion cloth and carton paper were cut with a sharp object and the carton was opened. The mobile phone was found missing from the carton. His friend contacted the complainant and confirmed that two items were sent. Then he filed a written complain...

S. Jayagopalan Vs. V. Sathyanarayanan

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

COMMON JUDGMENT SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA,MEMBER Both appeals preferred from the very same order in OP.4/02 passed by the CDRF, Malappuram on the date of 29th September 2003. In appeal No.231/04 the appellant is the complainant and in appeal 378/04 the appellant is the opposite party in the above appeal. The appellant on 231/04 filed this appeal and to enhance of the compensation ordered by the Forum below. But the appellant in Appeal 378/04 filed this appeal for set aside the order passed by the forum below. Both appeal heard in together. 2. The complainant on 26.6.2000 entered in an agreement with opposite party for renovation of his house at a cost of Rs.2,65,000/-. An amount of Rs.2,30,000/- is paid in stages. As the work was not satisfactory, the complainant alleged with Malappuram District Consumer and Family Protection Council at whose presence complainant paid a further sum of Rs.20,000/-. The work is not completed. The work is already done is not satisfactory. Hence this complaint...

Shammi Firoz Vs. the National Investigation Agency

Court: Kerala

Reported in: ILR2010(4)Ker390

1. In these petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the  common petitioner who is the common 7th accused in Crime  Nos. 5 and 6 of 2009 of the National Investigation Agency, New  Delhi (formerly Crime Nos. 80 and 81 of 2006 of Kasaba and  Nadakkavu Police Stations, Kozhikode) for offences punishable  under Sections 120 B, 153 A and 324 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C.  and Sections 16 (1)(b), 18 and 23 of the Unlawful Activities  (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Section 3 of the Explosive  Substances Act, 1908, seeks his enlargement on bail .                            THE PROSECUTION CASE 2.   The case of the prosecution is that infuriated by the  attitude of the Executive and the Judiciary in not granting bail  to the Muslim accused persons involved in the Marad Case, the accused persons (9 in number) ha...