Kerala Court December 2011 Judgments
T.A. Harish, Proprietor Vs. P.D. Jithesh
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-31-2011
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU, PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party in OP.525/02 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur. The appellant is under orders to refund a sum of Rs.45,250/- with interest at 12% from 15.1.02 and to pay compensation of Rs.6,000/- and cost of Rs.600/-. 2. It is the case of the complainant that the computer Intel Pentium III with all accessories and UPS purchased from the opposite party on 17.7.01 got defective within a short period ie; in October 2001. It was an assembled computer. It is after much delay that the opposite party sent technicians to rectify the defects. Subsequently, on 15.1.02 the computer again became defective. The opposite party when intimated behaved in a rude manner. Lawyer notice was sent on 8.2.02. 3. The opposite party has contended that in fact the computer was purchased on 27.6.2000 and not on 17.7.01 as alleged. He had replaced the mother board of the computer free of cost within the period of warranty. It is denied that there was delay...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Company Ltd, Nelson Complex, Puthiyidom, Kayamkulam ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-31-2011
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT Appellants are the opposite parties/Insurance Company in CC.291/09 in the file of CDRF, Alappuzha. The appellants are under orders to pay Rs.40,000/- and compensation of Rs.10,000/-. 2. The case of the complainant is that he was covered by the mediclaim policy of the opposite party from the year 2005 (sic 2003) the coverage which was Rs.50,000/-. The same was enhanced to Rs.1.lakh in the year 2007. On 26.6.2007 he was found to be suffering from Coronory Artery Disease and was admitted at St.Gregorious Hospital, Parumala and a sum of Rs.21,000/- was spent for treatment. Subsequently he was admitted at MIOT Hospitals, Chennai and on 6.8.2007 he underwent bypass surgery. He has spent a sum of Rs.1,53,000/- for treatment. The opposite parties allowed only Rs.50,000/- the sum assured with respect to the previous policy. He has sought for the balance amount of Rs.40,000/- and cumulative bonus of Rs.25,000/-. 3. The opposite parties/appellants have fil...
Tag this Judgment!Thrissur District Athletic Association, (Affiliated Unit âstate A ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-31-2011
JUSTICE SRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties/District Athletic Association in CC.749/08 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur. The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation with interest at 12% from the date of complaint and cost of Rs.500/-. 2. The case of the complainant who is a physically handicapped person is that he was insulted and not permitted to take part in the 100 meters race organized by the opposite parties. According to him at the time of starting of the race he was asked to sit in a crouching position with hands and one knee in contact with the ground. According to him he told the officials that he is incapable of doing that and then he was insulted by calling him handicapped and was not permitted to take part. He had paid the requisite fee for taking part in the competition. As he was insulted he did not take part in the shot-put competition also and according to him he had undergo treatment of a psychiatrist on a...
Tag this Judgment!The Branch Manager, Hdfc Bank Ltd. and Another Vs. K.P. Joy
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-31-2011
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU, PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties/Financiers in OP.1081/04 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur. The appellants were called absent and set ex-parte before the Forum. The appellants are under orders to refund the cost of the vehicle after deducting 2 instalment amounts and to pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- and cost of Rs.500/-. 2. It is the case of the complainant that he had availed a vehicle loan of Rs.29,000/- from the opposite party on 29.3.03 for purchasing an Yemaha Libero motor cycle. He was remitting the payments in time except the 2 instalments before the vehicle was seized by force on 18.8.04. The vehicle was seized without any intimation. Opposite parties had issued a notice directing to pay the entire outstanding loan amount of Rs.25,200/- on or before 24.8.04. The complainant was ready to remit the outstanding 2 instalments. 3. The evidence adduced consisted of Exts.P1 to P5 and the proof affidavit filed by the complainant. 4. The ...
Tag this Judgment!The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd.,, Angamali, Rep.by Its Manager and Anot ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-31-2011
JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties in CC.853/05 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur. The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs.7815/.34 and compensation of Rs.3000/- and cost of Rs.500/-. 2. The case of the complainant is that the autoriksha owned by him having full coverage with the opposite parties met with an accident. According to him he had spent a sum of Rs.10864/- for repairs. The claim was repudiated on the ground that the driver was not having badge. The complaint is filed claming repair charges of Rs.10864/- with interest at 12% and compensation of Rs.10000/-. 3. The opposite parties have filed version contending that the driver at the time of the accident was not having a valid badge which is mandatory as per Section 3 of the Motor Vehicle Act. The vehicle involved is a good carriage commercial vehicle. It is also pointed out the loss assessed by the surveyor is only Rs.7815.34. 4. The evidence adduced consisted of Ext.P1 series...
Tag this Judgment!The Managing Partner, Asian Agencies and Another Vs. the President/Sec ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-31-2011
JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties/dealer and manufacturer who are under orders to replace the weed cutter machine or to pay Rs.19,800/- to the complainant with interest at 12% and also cost of Rs.1000/-. 2. It is the case of the complainant that complainant/society represented by its Secretary that they had purchased a weed cutter machine by name Sparta-42 manufactured by the 2nd opposite party from the 1st opposite party dealer paying Rs.19,800/- in august, 2008. After the free service on 30.9.08 the machine was not working properly. Thereafter also it was serviced on 16.10.08 and again it was not working properly. Later the carburetor of the machine had to be changed and a sum of Rs.2000/- was paid for the same. In order to complete the contract works undertaken they had to repair the machine paying amounts as demanded. On 12.11.08 the machine was repaired by paying an amount of Rs.2450/-. Again the machine became defective and the complai...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Singsons Electronics (Defunt) Represented by Its Ex-manager D. Su ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-30-2011
SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram in OP No. 344/2004 order dated: 15.3.2011. The appellant is the 3rd opposite party and the respondents are the complainant and 1st and 2nd opposite parties in the above said OP respectively. 2. The appeal prefers under directions of the Forum below is that the opposite parties shall jointly and severally pay the complaint a sum of Rs.20,000 towards compensation within 2 months from the date of receipt of the order. 3. The dispute in the complaint in connection with purchased an Akai TV Set on 06.07.1998 the 1st opposite party is a dealer. There is a Money back Scheme in which the opposite party promised to refund Rs.30,000/- on 06.06.04, that is an assurance on the money back scheme, opposite party handed over the complainant a post dated cheque dated 22.06.2004, drawn by one Baron International Ltd. on the Siam Commercial Bank, P.C.L, Nariman Point Branch, Mumbai, that the said c...
Tag this Judgment!Senior Commercial Manager, Southern Railway, Chennai and Others Vs. T. ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-30-2011
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENTThe appellants are the opposite parties/Railways in C.C. 186/09 in the file of CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram. The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs. 1,45,928/- with interest at 9% from 19.05.08, Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as costs. The case of the complainant is that 375kgs of copper wire packed in 5 gunny bags and entrusted with the opposite parties at Selam Junction to be delivered at Ernakulam town Railway Station was not delivered. On representations made only a sum of Rs. 18,052/- sanctioned for the loss of the goods worth Rs. 1,48,026/- He had received a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as advance from the consignee. He has claimed a sum of Rs. 3 lakh as compensation. The opposite parties have filed version contending that the details of the consignment and the individual value was not declared. In case of declaration of the value transportation charges on percentage basis vide section 103(2) of the Railways Act, 1989 and Rules...
Tag this Judgment!Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd. and Another Vs. K.V. Paulose
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-30-2011
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties/financiers in CC.165/08 in the file of CDRF, Ernakulam. The appellants are under orders to refund a sum of Rs.1,20,481/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of complaint. 2. The case of the complainant is that he purchased a PC 200-6 machine for earning his livelihood by means of self-employment and that for the same he availed a loan of Rs.40.lakhs from the opposite parties and executed the hypothecation agreement on 20.11.2005. The loan was to be repaid in 41 instalments at the rate of Rs.1,10,123/-. On 16.11.2006 the machine met with an accident. The insurer settled the claim for Rs.28,46,151/-. The financier/opposite parties collected the amount from the insurer. By the time the machine was fully repaired and delivered to the complainant by the manufacturer. The opposite parties closed a loan account prematurely without the consent of the complainant and issued a cheque in favour of the complai...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Singsons Electronics (Defunt) Represented by Its Ex-manager D. Su ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-30-2011
SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram in OP No. 375/2004 order dated : 15.3.2011. The appellant is the 1st opposite party and the respondents are the complainant and 2nd and 3rd opposite parties in the above said OP respectively. 2. The appeal prefers under directions of the Forum below is that to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation to the complainant by the 1st opposite party/appellant within 3 months from the date of receipt of the order. 3. The dispute in the complaint in connection with purchased an Akai TV Set on 22.07.1998, that the 1st opposite party is a dealer. There is a Money back Scheme in which the opposite party promised to refund Rs.30,000/- on 22.06.04, that is an assurance on the money back scheme, opposite party handed over the complainant a post dated cheque dated 22.06.2004, drawn by one Baron International Ltd. on the Siam Commercial Bank, P.C.L, Nariman Point Branch, Mumbai, that the said cheque was ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »