Kerala Court December 2011 Judgments
M/S Maruti Udyog Limited Vs. Sh. George P.V. and Another
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-29-2011
SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Ernakulam in OP 407/2004. The appellant is the 1st opposite party and the respondents are the complainant and 2nd opposite party in the above mentioned OP. This appeal prefers under the order directed the opposite parties to pay the complainant Rs. 34,000/- with interest at 10% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint on 12.8.04 and cost of Rs.1,000/- within a period of 1 month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Both parties are jointly and severally liable to comply with this order. 2. In brief, the complainant have a case that he purchased a Maruthi Sen LX vehicle on 19.2.03 manufactured by the 1st opposite party, from the 2nd opposite party for plying it as a taxi for earning his livelihood. The registration of the vehicle was done as taxi on 21.2.03 and the complainant is entitled for Rs. 34,000/- towards excise duty refund. After one week from the date of registration, t...
Tag this Judgment!Baburajan P.M., Managing Director and Others Vs. M.T. James, Director, ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-29-2011
COMMON JUDGMENT: SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the Forum below in CC No 81/09, which filed on 11.06.09 by the CDRF, Pathanamthitta. The appeal No. 366/10 filed by the complainant for awarding compensation for loss sustained by him from the above mentioned order. Appeal 387/10 filed by the 3rd opposite party to set aside the impugned order passed by the Forum below. A. 222/10 filed by 1st and 2nd opposite parties, to set aside the impugned order passed by the Forum below. 3 appeals mentioned above prefers from the very same order passed by the Forum below. 2. In short, the complainant is the Managing Director of Hotel Bezota International, Thiruvalla which is a three star hotel and he had placed an order for purchasing a 180 KVA Diesel Generator Set with 1st opposite party for his hotel for getting steady and uninterrupted electric supply. The 2nd opposite party is the maintenance agent and the 3rd opposite party is the manufacturer of the...
Tag this Judgment!The Managing Director, Kingfisher Airlines Ltd. and Another Vs. A.V.Ga ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-28-2011
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT Appellants are the opposite parties 2 and 3 in CC.123/11 in the file of CDRF, Kasaragod. The matter stands disposed of uncontested. The opposite parties/appellants were exparte before the Forum. It is submitted that the counsel failed to appear before the Forum on the posting date. In the circumstances and in view of the fact that the order is not a properly considered one the same is set aside on condition that the appellants/opposite parties pay a sum of Rs.8000/- towards cost or deposit the same before the Forum which can be withdrawn by the complainant. On payment of cost the Forum will permit the opposite parties to contest the case and dispose the same on merits. The case stands posted before the Forum on 24.1.2012. The office will forward a copy of this order to the Forum....
Tag this Judgment!Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co.Ltd. and Others Vs. Sm ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-28-2011
JUSTICE SRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties 1 to 3/Bajaj Allianz Life insurance Co. in CC.Nos.167/09 and 168/09 in the file of CDRF, Pathanamthitta. The appellants are under orders to refund a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- each to the complainants in the respective CCs and to pay a compensation of Rs.15000/- and cost of Rs.5000/- with interest at 10% from the date of order. The complainants are the wife(cc.167/09) and the husband(CC.168/09) in the respective complaints. 2. It is the case that they had joined in the life insurance policy under unit plus scheme of the opposite parties/appellants. The total premium was Rs.4,50,000/-, to be paid in 3 yearly payments at the rate of Rs.1,50,000/- each. The 4th opposite party/Field Officer of the Insurance Company used to collected the premium of cheques and issue receipts. Accordingly the cheques were issued in the name of the 4th opposite party and 4th opposite party used to remit the premium and the company used...
Tag this Judgment!Sumesh, the Proprietor, Cobbler Vs. Balasubramanyam V. @ Balu
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-28-2011
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENTThe appellant is the opposite party in C.C. 266/11 in the file of CDRF, Kozhikode. The opposite parties/appellantsare under orders to refund a sum of Rs. 850/- and also to pay compensation or Rs. 500/- The case of the complainant is that he purchased on 16.4.2011 a footwear from the shop of the opposite party for a sum of Rs. 850/- Soon after the same got damaged. The opposite party had promised to repair the same if any damages occur within 6 months of sale. According to the complainant he travels mainly in motorcycle and car and hence the footwear was not used in a rough manner. He want to get the foot wear repaired, but was sent back without honoring his assurance. He has sought for refund of the price of the footwear and Rs. 1,000/- as compensation. The Forum has noted in the order that the opposite party was not willing for an amicable settlement. It is mentioned in the order that Ext. A1, A2 is marked which is sales bill and service receip...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Babu and Another Vs. C.V. Ambili and Others
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-27-2011
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties 4 and 5, the Postmaster and the Post man respectively in C.C. 484/08 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur. The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with interest at 12% from the date of complaint and cost of Rs. 500/- It is the case of the complainant that the complainant belonged to the Scheduled Caste Community and a BPL Ration Card holder. She underwent 3 years Diploma Course in Commercial Practice from the Polytechnic. She had applied for a job in KITCO as Office Assistant. The interview letter from KITCO was posted on 10.5.07 under Certificate of Posting to appear for the interview on 16.5.2007. The letter was delivered only on 18.5.2007 at 2 pm by the 5th opposite party. By the time the date of interview was over. The fourth opposite party , Post Master told her that the letter was received at the post office only on 18.5.2007. The post for which she had applied carried a sum of Rs. 7,50...
Tag this Judgment!The Managing Director, M/S Hercules Automobiles Vs. Smt.Jayalakshmi
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-26-2011
JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties/dealer in CC.200/09 in the file of CDRF, Alappuzha. The appellants are under orders to refund a sum of Rs.50000/- with interest at 16% from the date of deposit and also to pay Rs.25000/- as compensation and Rs.2000/- as costs. 2. The case of the complainant is that she has paid a sum of Rs.10000/- to the dealer on 3.10.08 for booking a Maruti Swift Car. It was assured that the vehicle will be delivered before 10.11.08. The complainant was asked to remit a further amount of Rs.40000/- and she remitted the above amount on 6.10.08. On 10.11.08 she contacted the opposite party and was told that there will be delay of one week to supply the car. On 20.11.08 again she contacted and was told that it will take 6 months to deliver the car. As there was inordinate delay she requested to cancel the booking and refund the amount on 21.11.08. The 1st opposite party had collected the receipt of remittance mentioning that ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Morepen Laboratories Ltd. and Another Vs. T.L. Ganesh and Another
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-24-2011
SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The appellants are the opposite parties 1 and 2 and respondents 1 and 2 are the complainant and 3rd opposite party respectively in O.P. No. 336/2005 on the file of CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram. The complaint therein was filed against the opposite parties 1 to 3 alleging deficiency in service in their failure to disburse the maturity value of the deposited amount to the complainant. It was alleged that the complainant deposited Rs. 18,000/- on 03.07.2002 with the first opposite party M/s. Morepen Laboratories Limited with an Agreement to get the maturity value of Rs. 25,292/- on the maturity date of 03.07.2005, but the opposite parties failed to disbursed the said amount. Hence the complaint was filed claiming Rs. 25,900/- with interest and compensation of Rs. 50,000/- 2. The opposite parties 1and 2 entered appearance before the Forum below and filed written version denying the alleged deficiency in service. They contended that they filed a company P...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Morepen Laboratories Ltd. and Another Vs. T.S. Geetha and Another
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-24-2011
SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The appellants are the opposite parties 1 and 2 and respondents 1 and 2 are the complainant and 3rd opposite party respectively in O.P. No. 335/05 on the file of CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram. The complaint therein was filed against the opposite parties 1 to 3 alleging deficiency in service in their failure to disburse the maturity value of the deposited amount to the complainant. It was alleged that the complainant deposited Rs. 25,000/- on 11/4/2002 with the first opposite party M/s. Morepen Laboratories Limited with an Agreement to get the maturity value of Rs. 35,128/- on the maturity date of 11.4.2005, but the opposite parties failed to disbursed the said amount. Hence the complaint was filed claiming Rs. 36,900/- with interest and compensation of Rs. 50,000/- 2. The opposite parties 1and 2 entered appearance before the Forum below and filed written version denying the alleged deficiency in service. They contended that they filed a company Petit...
Tag this Judgment!The Manager, Centurian Bank of Punjab, Now Hdfc Bank Vs. P. Sasikumar ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Dec-24-2011
SHRI. S. CHANDRA MOHAN NAIR: MEMBER These appeals are filed by the 1st opposite party in CC.30/08 before the CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram. Appeal-382/11 is filed against the final order passed by the Forum below on 30.6.2010 by which the appellant is under direction to refund to the complainant a sum of Rs.14,15,000/- with 9% interest from 20.1.2007 till realization and to refund another sum of Rs.1,24,810/- with 9% interest from 26.1.2007 till realization along with compensation of Rs.30,000/- and cost of Rs.5000/-. Appeal-421/11 is filed against the orders in the execution application No.72/10 in CC.30/08 by the Forum below. 2. The complainant had approached the Forum stating that he had purchased a JCB 3D excavator from the 1st opposite party on payment of Rs.14,15,000/-. It was submitted that the excavator originally belonged to one Chacko Joseph from whom the 1st opposite party had re-possessed the excavator due to default in payment. The complainant had stated that at the time of pur...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »