Kerala Court July 2011 Judgments

The Manager, M/S Icici Lombard General Insurance-co. Ltd. and Others V ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER Appellants are the opposite parties 1, 2 and 4 and respondents are the complainant and 3rd opposite party respectively in CC.171/09 on the file of CDRF, Kasaragod. The complaint was filed by one Abdul Hameed P.M as representative/agent of Shameer, Koolikkad claiming compensation on the ground of deficiency of service on the part of the appellants/opposite parties 1,2 and 4 in repudiating the insurance claim with respect to the insured vehicle bearing registration No.KL-14 E 8130. The opposite parties 1, 2 and 4 (appellants) entered appearance and filed written version denying the alleged deficiency of service. They challenged the maintainability of the complaint because the complainant, Abdul Hammed had no locustandi to file the complaint on behalf of Shameer, Koolikkad. They also contended that the insured, Shammer Koolikkad had transferred his vehicle to a 3rd party and that the complainant Abdul Hameed is the defacto owner of the insured vehi...

A.V. Sankaranarayanan Vs. Sindhu Sankar

Court: Kerala

ThottathilB.Radhakrishnan, J. 1. Petitioner's wife applied to the Family Court for custody of two daughters who reside with her. Petitioner filed objections. Later, he sought leave to amend the objections to plead that his wife is unfit to have the custody of the children. He also wanted to seek the relief that he be granted custody. The Family Court refused to grant leave. Challenging that, the husband has filed this original petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. Law shows special concern for children. It provides for their protection. Law and justice have deep concern for children. Julius Stone, in"Social Dimensions of Law and Justice", points out that such concern for children is manifest in modern law. This concern for children pertains to their deficiency in capacity for self-provision, self-protection and self-guidance. This generates the often reiterated paramountcy of the welfare of the child. 3. The concept of parens patriae, often stated to have originat...

Archana J. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Police and Another

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2011(4)KLT25(SN)(C.No.24)

ThottathilB.Radhakrishnan, J This writ petition is filed seeking two reliefs, which, in our view, are independent. 2. The second respondent who is the husband of the petitioner filed an application for divorce before the Family Court charging the wife with adultery with an unidentified paramour. He relies on a compact disc (C.D.) which he has produced as Document No.4 before the Family Court. According to him, it contains materials which would evidence the wife's alleged conduct. The wife, in turn, insists that she may be given a copy of that C.D. since she has to defend the allegations against her. The request for a copy of the material is well founded. The procedure for issuing copies of such C.D.s are not directly covered by any rule in the Family Court Rules, Civil Rules of Practice, High Court Rules etc. as is reported by the Registrar General. But we are inclined to think that a copy has to be given by the person who has produced the material. We record the request of the learned...

In Re M.V. Jayarajan

Court: Kerala

CONTENTS Table SYNOPSIS On 23/06/2010 a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court comprising of Justice C. N. Ramachandran Nair and Justice P. S. Gopinathan while disposing of a Writ Petition filed in public interest, banned the holding of meetings and rallies on public roads and road margins thereby ensuring accident-free and uninterrupted traffic along such roads. On 26/06/2010 in a meeting organised in Kannur town in protest against the hike of fuel prices, the respondent M. V. Jayarajan, a non practicing Advocate ill-informed in law and a politician belonging to the C.P.I (Marxist) party, made a public speech. The speech was widely covered by the print and visual media. During the course of the speech he reacted vigorously against the High Court verdict and declared that the people throughout Kerala were openly disobeying the verdict by holding meetings and rallies on the roads and road margins. He asked that when such Court verdicts have only the value of grass what worth do the Ju...

The Asst.Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organiz ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

M.K. Abdulla Sona, Member: 1. This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Kannur in CC No. 264/09 dated 13-09-2010. The appellant is the opposite party and the respondent is the complainant respectively. The Forum below directed the appellant/opposite party to issue pension payment order for reduced pension to the complainant from 01-04-2009 along with Rs. 500/- as cost of the proceedings to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which complainant is at liberty to execute the order as per the provisions of the CP Act. 2. The complainant is having a case that he was an employee of Kanhirode Weavers Industrial Co-operative Society and a member of EPF having more than 20 years of service from 01-09-76 to 31-01-97. The complainant discontinued his service on 31-01-1997 on medical ground. Thereafter the complainant filed application for provident fund benefit and for disablement pension and it was rejected by the opposite party. The compl...

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Simi Sebastian

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The appellant is the first opposite party National Insurance Company Ltd and the respondent is the complainant in C.C. No. 307/06 on the file of CDRF, Ernakulam. The opposite parties 2 and 3 in C.C. 307/06 are the Grievance Cell Manager and branch manager of M/s. National Insurance Co. Ltd. But they were not made parties to the present appeal, on the ground that they are only the officers of M/s. National Insurance Company Ltd. The complaint in C.C. 307/06 was filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in repudiating the insurance claim preferred by the complainant with respect to the Jeevan Suraksha Insurance Policy issued by National Insurance Company in the name of the complainants husband. Sebastian Varghese. The complainant claimed the policy amount under said policy No. 570704/47/99/9600780 and compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for mental agony , hardship and financial loss suffered by the complainant on account of the d...

M/S.Minority Arts and Science College Vattaprarambu, Padinharangadi an ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

COMMON JUDGMENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT The appeals are filed over the orders in CC Nos.41/09, 43/09, 52/09, 51/09, 44/09, 46/09, 47/09, 48/09, 49/09 50/09 in the file of CDRF, Palakkad. The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the complainants and also to pay cost of Rs.2,000/- and if the amount is not paid within one month to pay interest at 9% p.a from the date of the order till realization. 2. The issues involves are similar in nature. Hence he appeals are disposed of by a common order. 3. The case of the complainant is that on the representation of the opposite parties which is an affiliated college to the Universityof Callicutthe complainants joined the B.com course after remitting a sum of Rs.6,000/- as fee. Classes commenced on 23.7.08. They attended the class till 31/01/09. Subsequently, it was found that the college had not obtained the required affiliation and recognition from the Universityof Calicutand the Government of Kerala. It i...

Pradeep Vs. P.V. Mathai and Others

Court: Kerala

BASANT, J. Claimant is the appellant. He claimed compensation for personal injuries suffered by him in a motor accident, which occurred on 27.12.1999. The 3rd respondent insurer was made liable. Against a claim of Rs.12 lakhs, an amount of Rs.6,67,200/- was ordered to be paid along with interest at 6% per annum and proportionate cost. 2. The appellant/claimant claims to be aggrieved by the impugned award. It is unnecessary for us to advert to the chequered previous history of this case. It was once allowed by the Tribunal. In appeal before this Court by the claimant/appellant, the matter was remanded back. The impugned award was passed subsequently after remand. 3. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.6,67,200/- as per the details shown below: i) Pain and suffering : Rs. 20,000.00 ii) Medical expenses : Rs. 28,600.00 + Additional Medical Expenses : Rs. 11,600.00 iii) Bystander's expenses : Rs. 15,200.00 (152 X 100) iv) Transport to hospital : Rs. 3,000.00 v) Loss of earning : Rs. 18,00...

Anitha Jose and Others Vs. State of Kerala Represented by Secretary to ...

Court: Kerala

J. Chelameswar, C.J. These two appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 3rd July 2007 rendered in two writ petitions namely W.P. (C) Nos. 12587 of 2007 and 12874 of 2007. 2. The facts leading to the litigation are as follows: The Government of India decided to acquire certain parcels of land in the State of Kerala for the establishment of Inland Water Transport Terminals at three place called Thanneermukkom North, Mullackal and Thrikkunnappuzha. For the purpose of the fulfillment of the said project, the Government of India entrusted its functions to the Govt. of Kerala, by issuing notification invoking the power under Article 258 of the Constitution of India dated 19th January, 1985. Thereafter, the Govt. of Kerala issued a notification dated 16th December 1987 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act,1894, indicating the various parcels of land proposed to be acquired in the three villages mentioned above. 3. In these two appeals, we are concerned with the acquisition, in s...

M/S. Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ernakulam Vs. State of Ker ...

Court: Kerala

C. N. Ramachandran Nair, J. 1. The question raised in these connected revision cases filed by the same company is whether the Tribunal was justified in confirming disallowance of sales returns claimed. We have heard counsel appearing for the petitioner and Government Pleader for the State. 2. Petitioner is a leading manufacturer of medicines distributed in Kerala. The trade practice followed by all medicine manufacturers including the petitioner is to take back the stock from the dealers on expiry of the shelf - life. Manufacturing companies market medicines by appointing distributors / agencies and selling it to them who in turn sell to retail dealers from whom customers purchase medicines. During the assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-03 the company claimed exemption from sales tax on the value of goods recalled or returned by retailers on expiry of shelf - life before sale. Return of such life expired medicines by the retailers is to the distributors who in turn returns the same to t...