Kerala Court October 2011 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.
K.P. Mohammed Sheriff Vs. M. Hassan Kani Rawther (Died) and Others
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-17-2011
P. BHAVADASAN, J, 1. The plaintiff, who was non-sited by the court below, is the appellant. 2. Certain facts are admitted. The plaintiff was a tenant under the defendant in respect of a shop room. There was an agreement for sale dated 17.9.1985 evidenced by Ext.A20(a) by which the shop room and a portion of the land behind the shop room was agreed to be sold to the plaintiff for a sum of Rs.70,000/- and Rs.10,000/- was received in pursuance thereof. The period fixed was three months. Admittedly, due to certain reasons, the sale deed was not executed and the resulted in execution of a fresh agreement evidenced by Ext.A1 dated 17.12.1985. That in fact, though referred to the shop room and its rear portion, it is claimed by the plaintiff that pursuant to Ext.A1, another sum of Rs.25,000/- was paid and he was put in possession of the rear portion of the shop room which was agreed to be conveyed to him. Eversince then, he has been in possession and enjoyment of the suit property, it is poin...
Prasanna S. Menon Vs. Narayana Nair
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-17-2011
1. This revision is in challenge of the order passed by learned Sub Judge, Kozhikode while executing the decree in O.S.No.306 of 1990. That decree was obtained by one G.K.Menon for recovery of money from the respondent/judgment debtor. The decree was passed on 7.2.1991. G.K. Menon died on 6.8.1991 issues but, leaving behind his wife, Annalakshmi Amma. She died on 24.2.1692. It is stated that her sister, Sreedevi Amma executed a Will in favour of petitioners on 23.1.1995 whereby the decree was bequeathed to the petitioners. The said Sreedevi Amma died on 1.4.1996. Petitioners filed O.P.No.77 of 1994 under S.372 of the Indian Succession Act (for short, “the Succession Act”) for issue of a certificate of succession to execute the decree against the respondent as required under S.214 of the said Act. The Succession Court passed Ext.P1, order pursuant to which Annexure - 6, certificate petitioner filed E.P.No.80 of 2003 against the respondent. As I am told, notice under R....
Usha Ramesh Bhose and Another Vs. Dr. C. Ashokan, Managing Partner
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Oct-17-2011
SHRI. M.V. VISWANATAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The appellants are the complainants and respondent is the opposite party in C.C. No. 246/10. The aforesaid complaint was filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. But the complaint was filed with a delay petition for condoning the delay of 62 days in preferring the complaint in C.C. 246/10. The opposite party disputed the correctness of the averments in the Delay Condonation Petition. The Forum below considered the aforesaid Delay Condonation Petition and found that there was no sufficient reason or cause for condoning the said delay of 62 days. Hence the Delay Condonation Petition was dismissed and thereby the complaint was also dismissed on the ground that the complaint is barred by limitation. It is against the said order dated 25.2.2011 passed by CDRF, Kannur, the present appeal is preferred by the complainants therein. 2. We heard both sides. 3. The learned counsel for the appellants/complainants submitted his a...
Balan Vemballur Vs. Thulasi Bai Amma
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Oct-17-2011
K.R. UDAYABHANU : PESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party in C.C. 140/2008 in the file of CDRF, Palakkad. The appellant is under orders to pay the sum of Rs. 1,34,000/- with interest at 12% and also to pay compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and cost of Rs. 2,000/- It is the case of the complainant that she had entrusted the construction of a R.C.C. residential house with the opposite party as per agreement dated 23.5.07 with the terms the construction will be effected at Rs. 575/sq.ft. A sum of Rs. 1,25,000/- has paid as advance. Altogether the complainant has paid a sum of Rs. 7.75 lakhs. It is alleged that the construction was executed not as per the approved plan and that the ground floor and the first floor has been built with different measurements and that the stair case has been constructed not as per the approved plan and that the same has resulted in wastage of interior space and that the wood is of inferior quality and that the windows are not provided as per the plan and the e...
Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co.Ltd., Vs. M.K. Kunjuvaru
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Oct-15-2011
SRI. M.V.VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The appellant is the 1st opposite party and respondent is the complainant in OP.68/05 on the file of CDRF, Thrissur. The complaint was filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in their failure to deliver the duplicate key and no objection certificate with respect to the vehicle which was purchased with the financial assistance of the opposite party Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd. It is alleged that there occurred delay of one year on the part of the opposite parties to issue no objection certificate to get the hypothecation endorsement cancelled. Thus, the complainant claimed compensation of Rs.50000/- with cost of Rs.1500/-. 2. The opposite parties entered appearance and filed written version denying the alleged deficiency in service. It is contended that the complainant failed to remit the loan amount within the stipulated time and overdue charges were due to the opposite party/financier and ultimate...
Kerala State Private Bus Operators Federation Vs. Insurance Regulatory ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-2011
COMMON JUDGMENT P.S. GOPINATHAN, J. 1. Writ Appeal is against decision reported in 2011 (3) KLT 192. The Appeals are preferred against the common judgment of the learned Single Judge dismissing W.P.(C) No. 13288, 13407, 13818, 14457, 14512, 16676 and 15013 of 2011. Appellants are the petitioners in W.P.(C) 13288 and 13818 of 2011. It is submitted that other petitioners had not chosen to prefer any appeal. By a notification, copy of which was produced as Ext.P2 in W.P.(C) 13288/2011, the 1st respondent, in supersession of its earlier notification, Ref:043/IRDA/DE-Tariff/January-07 Dated 23.1.2007 revised premium rates for third party liability only cover in respect of the motor vehicles with effect from 25.4.2011. Assailing Ext.P2, the Writ Petitions were filed. Ext.P2 was assailed on three grounds; (i) regarding the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent to issue a notification like Ext.P2, (ii) denial of opportunity of hearing the petitioners/appellants and (3) the extent of the enhanceme...
Anil Mon Thomas and Another Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, Repre ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-14-2011
1. Criminal M.C. 3265 of 2011 is the petition filed by the witnesses under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash Annexure-3 order dated 31.08.2011 passed by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Ernakulam. Criminal M.C. 3449/2011 is the petition filed by the second accused in that sessions case who also seeks quashment of Annexure - 3 order dated 31.08.2011. The petitioner in Criminal M.C.3265/11 was examined before the Court below in the aforesaid sessions case as PW12. The charge sheet in that case was laid alleging that the accused murdered a boy after subjecting him to carnal intercourse against the order of nature. The accused therein was arrested on 10.02.2010. His bail application was dismissed by the trial court as well as by this Court on several occasions. An observation was made by the trial court in Criminal M.P.23/9/10 that is the trial was not completed before 10.02.2011 the accused could apply for trial again. But in the meanwhile, the bail application filed by him was already...
Professional Courier Pvt.Ltd. and Another Vs. Finny Abraham Samuel
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Oct-14-2011
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties/couriers in CC.111/09 in the file of CDRF, Pathanamthitta. The appellants are under orders to pay a compensation of Rs.25,000/- and cost of Rs.2000/- with interest at 9%. 2. The case of the complainant is that he was appointed as 4th Engineer in the Univan Ship Management Ltd. vide their service contract dated 26.12.08 for a period of 7 months for a salary of US $ 3552 ( Rs.1,77,600/-) per month. A minor mistake was noticed in the Continuous Discharge Certificate (CDC) which required correction from Shipping Master, Mumbai. For the same he sent his CDC to Shipping Master, Government Shipping Office, Nan Bavan, 10 R.K. Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai through the opposite party/Courier service on 19.1.09 vide receipt No.3336263. Usually the corrections are carried out within one week. As no reply was received he contacted the Shipping Masters Office and found that the CDC was not delivered. The complainant approac...
Mar Gregorious Memorial Muthoot Medical Centre Vs. Kerala University o ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-13-2011
Is the respondent University is supposed to act just as a ‘Rubber Stamp’ in the matter of granting affiliation to Institutions invoking the power under Sections 50/53 of the Kerala University of Health Sciences Act, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as University Act), once approval is granted in respect of the courses and infrastructure by the Indian Nursing Council (INC) and Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council (KNMC), forms the point to be considered. 2. The factual position as narrated in the W.P.(C) 24933 of 2011 is that the petitioner, who is a Self Financing Institution was running B.Sc Nursing Programme right from the year 2003 and was granted Ext.P1 sanction by the Indian Nursing Council for conducting M.Sc Nursing Programme in three different faculties such as Medical Surgical Nursing, Psychiatric Nursing and Pediatric Nursing with an intake of four students each. Subsequently, the State Council constituted under the Kerala Travancore Cochin Nurses and Midwives Act, gra...
P. Purushothaman Vs. P. Sarojini and Others
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Oct-13-2011
1. It started as a suit for partition - OS No. 213 of 1991 filed by the petitioner in the Court of learned Munsiff, Varkala. He demanded partition and separate possession of his 2/15 shares in the suit property. The 2nd respondent - 2nd defendant claimed her share and separate possession and paid Court fee for the same. It is said that the 8th respondents / 9th defendant who had 5/15 shares in the suit property transferred his right to the 1st respondent - 1st defendant as per registered gift deed No. 500 of 1975. Learned Munsiff passed a preliminary decree on 28/01/1993 allotting shares as pleaded by petitioner and other defendants. After the preliminary decree was passed, it is claimed by petitioner that he acquired the 5/15 shares of the 1st respondent - 1st defendant (which 1st respondent got as per the gift deed in question) as per sale deed No. 1074 of 1994 dated 21/03/1994. Petitioner filed IA No. 740 of 1994 to pass a supplementary preliminary decree taking note of the 5/15 sha...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »