Kerala Court August 2010 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.
M/S.Sakthi Automobiles, (a Division of Abt Industries Ltd.) Vs. L. Gur ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Aug-06-2010
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R. UDAYABHANU, PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party in CC 103/2006 in the file of CDRF, Palakkad. The appellants are under orders to replace 2005 model with 2006 model 407 SFC Tata goods vehicle or to refund Rs.30,000/- and cost of Rs.1000/-. 2. There is no representation for the respondent/complainant. 3. It is the contention of the appellant that as per the Sale Certificate and the Price List the vehicle purchased by the complainant is 2005 model and the price of 2006 model is Rs.5,02,048/-. The appellant has produced the Sale Certificate and Price List before this Commission. The above were not produced before the Forum. It is contended that as the complainant opted for 2005 model he was given discount of Rs.30,000/- and only Rs,4,72,000/- was received from the complainant. 4. In the circumstances, we find that the matter requires reconsideration. The order of the Forum is set aside on condition that the appellant pay a sum of Rs.3000/- to the complainant to...
M/S T.V.S.Motors Company Ltd. and Another Vs. Ajith Kumar and Others
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Aug-05-2010
COMMOM JUDGMENT: JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU, PRESIDENT The appellant in appeal 118/05 is the second opposite party/manufacturer and the appellant in appeal 565/09 is the complainant in OP.125/03 in the file of CDRF, Kozhikode. The opposite parties are under orders to make the vehicle defect free and return back the same to the complainant within one month with an extended warranty of one more year and also to give a compensation of Rs.5000/-. 2. The case of the complainant is that he purchased a TVS MAX 100 R Motor Cycle from the first opposite party/dealer on 11.10.02 which is manufactured by the second opposite party. Altogether, the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.38557/- and took delivery of the same on 16.10.02. It is his case that it is attracted by the advertisement of the opposite parties in the news papers that he purchased the vehicle which is a necessity for him as he is a sales representative. It is alleged that immediately after purchase there was tumultuous sound from...
The Senior Manager, L.i.C. of India Vs. M.K. Kunhamina
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Aug-04-2010
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party/LIC of India in O.P. 182/04 in the file of CDRF, Kannoor. The appellants are under orders to pay Rs. 1,00,000/-, the assured sum and Rs. 1,000/- as cost to the complainant who is the nominee- mother of the deceased. 2.The case of the complainant is that her son Mohammed Haneefa was employed in the Middle East from 1988 onwards and when he came home, he availed a policy of the opposite party with effect from 8.5.2001. The sum assured was Rs. 1,00,000/-. The last premium paid was on 28.6.2002. All of a sudden her son became ill and died on 3.8.2002. He was perfectly able bodied. He was not having any symptoms or abnormality. The claim was repudiated. Her son was only 22 years of age. Hence the complainant claims the assured amount and also Rs. 15,000/- as compensation. 3. The opposite parties have filed version admitting the policy. It is mentioned that the proposal for the said policy was received on 30.6.20...
The Managing Director, M/S Shriram Transport and Finance Co. Ltd., Vs. ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Aug-04-2010
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU, PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party/financier in CC.55/09 in the file of CDRF, Palakkad. The appellant is under orders to return the original RC book to the complainant together with compensation of Rs.20,000/- and cost of Rs.1000/-. 2. The case of the complainant is that he had availed finance from the opposite party for the purchase of a Bajaj Minidor 3 wheeler goods carrier. The entire amounts were repaid. But the opposite parties have not returned the original RC book. Hence he is not in a position to ply the vehicle. From April 2008 onwards the vehicle is kept idle. 3. The case of the opposite party is that they are not in custody of the RC book and they had returned the original at the time of entering into the hire purchase agreement itself. It is admitted that the amounts were fully paid. 4. The evidence adduced consisted of the proof affidavit of the complainant and Exts.A1 to A7. 5. The opposite party did not adduce any evidence, even...
Fedders Lloyed Corporation Ltd. Vs. T.M. Gopinathan Nair and Another
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Aug-04-2010
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU, PRESIDENT The appellant is the 1st opposite party/manufacturer in CC.644/09 in the file of CDRF, Ernakulam. The appellant is under orders to replace the Air Conditioner with a new one and also to pay cost of Rs.1000/-. 2. The appellant was exparte before the Forum. It is pointed out by the appellant that the complainant has used the air conditioner in 2 years and it is then that the complaint has been filed. In the circumstances the order of the Forum is set aside on condition that the appellant pay a sum of Rs.5000/- to the complainant towards cost or deposit the same before the Forum which can be withdrawn by the complainant. The Forum will issue notice to the complainant and permit the parties to contest the matter and dispose of the case afresh. The case stands posted before the Forum on 5/10/2010. Office will forward copy of this order to the Forum....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›