Kerala Court February 2012 Judgments
M/S National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Anniyamma and Another
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2012
SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Alappuzha in CC No. 369/2009; order dated:28.2.2011. The appellant is the 2nd opposite party and the respondents are the complainant and 1st opposite party respectively. 2. The appellant prefers this appeal under the direction for the Forum below that directed the opposite parties to pay to the complainant the insured amount of Rs.1,00,000/- with 9% interest from the date of the application for claim till the recovery of the said amount and also ordered for the payment of a compensation of Rs.15,000/- along with a cost of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant. 3. The brief of the complainant is that the complainant is wife of late Lonappan who had taken a membership in Life India Health Care Scheme, that a certificate bearing No. 2F313478 was issued to him that as per the said certificate the policy holder is entitled to get accident/medical benefit, that the said fact is stated in the policy schedule and t...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Macson Tiller and Tractors Vs. A.K. Ramakrishnan
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2012
JUSTICE SRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties in CC.20/2008 in the file of CDRF, Wayanad. The appellants are under orders to refund Rs.85000/- with interest at 9%. 2. The case of the complainant is that he purchased a power tiller from the opposite parties for a sum of Rs.96950/-. The machine was having warranty of 2 years. The attachments such as light unit, leveler, flot, furrow, self starting system etc were not provided. Although it was assured that the service will be provided at the site the same was provided only once. After one month the tiller developed problems regarding self starting system. The tile wheel shaft broke during the operation. There was gear box oil leak, diesel pipe leak, excessive oil consumption, diesel tank leak etc. The above was on account of the poor materials used for manufacturing the components. The complainant had to spent money for repairs. The defects still persists. The complainant is not in a position to use the ...
Tag this Judgment!Sindu Shaji Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. and Another
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2012
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT The appellants are the complainants in CC. 25/08 in the file of CDRF, Pahanamthitta. The complaint stands dismissed. 2. It is the case of the complainants that the Mini Lorry owned by the first complainant wife and driven by the second complainant/husband was forcibly taken away by certain persons on 26.4.07 at 6 a.m. while the vehicle was running after collecting sand through Kayamkulam Punalur road. It is specifically stated that 3 persons in an Ambassdor Car got the Mini Lory forcibly stopped and pulled out the second complainant and took away the vehicle. Although, the police registered a crime the vehicle could not be traced. The vehicle is insured with the opposite parties for a sum of Rs.7.5 lakhs. The claim was repudiated. 3. The opposite parties have filed version contending that the opposite parties were intimated of the incident only on 1.1.08 ie; after 8 months. It is also pointed out that the police case has been registered only on 23...
Tag this Judgment!Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. Vs. Anna Benny and Another
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2012
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT Appellant is the opposite party/builder in CC.590/09 in the file of CDRF, Ernakulam. The appellant is under orders to refund Rs.10,000/- with interest at 12% from the date of receipt of the amount and also to pay Rs.5000/- as compensation. 2. The case of the complainants who are the wife and husband is that they had reserved a flat by paying Rs.2.lakhs on 10.12.2007 in the project of the opposite parties. On 29.3.2008 they received the intimation of allotment of the flat and was directed to pay Rs.5,70,700/- towards the first instalment. The complainants insisted for signing the contract before affecting payment. The terms of the draft agreement was found not acceptable and as the same contained certain anomalies. The complainant wanted the same to be rectified. At last on 7.7.2008 the complainants requested for refund of the advance amount but only a sum of Rs.1,90,000/- was refunded after deducting Rs.10,000/-. The complaint is filed for gettin...
Tag this Judgment!K. Avukoya Naha, (Died) and Others Vs. the Assistant Executive Enginee ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2012
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The complainants are the legal heirs of the deceased Avukoya Naha who has sought for a sum of Rs. 12,87,167/- to put the Ice Plant owned by him in a running condition and Rs. 2,50,000/- towards loss of income and Rs. 2 lakhs towards compensation for mental agony etc. The case of the complainants is that the Kerala Ice and Cold Storage, Parappanagady with Consumer No. 300/278 is owned by the complainants. It is alleged that the electric connection to the above establishment was dis connected without any reason consequent on the death of one Chandran who was electrocuted while working on an electric post on 23.3.90. The Commissioner for Workmens Compensation vide order in WC 279/90 directed the KSEB/Opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs. 86,764/- with interest at 6% as compensation for the death of the above person. Although the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation has found vide order dated 20.9.98 that the KSEB is responsible for the death elect...
Tag this Judgment!The Manager, M/S Tata Motors Ltd. and Another Vs. C.C. George
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2012
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties, the dealer and manufacturer in CC.343/06 who are under orders to replace the vehicle or to refund Rs.2,30,828/- after taking back the vehicle and to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- and cost of Rs.2000/-. 2. It is the case of the complainant that the Tata ACE Mini lorry purchased by him on 20.10.2005 for a sum of Rs.2,30,828/- for earning his livelihood by means of self-employment is having manufacturing defect. According to him the vehicle could not be moved through slightly elevated roads with the minimum load. 3. It was contended by the opposite parties that the complainant is not a consumer as he purchased the vehicle for commercial purpose. The allegation that the vehicle could not be moved through slightly elevated roads is denied. It is pointed out that whenever the vehicle was produced for service and repairs it was returned after recording full satisfaction by the complainant. 4. The evidence addu...
Tag this Judgment!State of Kerala, Rep.by the District Collector Vs. Soman and Others
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2012
JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellant is the 3rd opposite party/State of Kerala in CC.174/06 in the file of CDRF, Pathanamthitta. The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs.7000/- with interest at 8% from the date of complaint and cost of Rs.1000/- and if not paid within one month with interest at 10% from the date of the order. 2. The matter is with respect to compensation claimed with respect to the death of 4 goats consequent to vaccination to prevent FMD(Foot and Mouth disease). The opposite parties had paid Rs.2000/- prior to filing of the complaint for the death of one goat. 3. The complainant has sought for Rs.11000/- towards price of the goats. The opposite parties 1 and 2 the Veterinary Surgeons has disputed the contention of the complainant and contended that the death of one goat on 1.9.06 was only due to allergic reactions as found in the postmortem report and for the same a sum of Rs.2000/- was paid. The death of the other goats on 4.9.06 and 18.9.06...
Tag this Judgment!The Manager, T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Limited and Another Vs. Sh ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2012
SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Kollam in CC No. 416/2006 order dated : 30.9.2010. The 2nd and 3rd opposite parties are the appellants and the complainant and 1st opposite party are the respondents. The appellants prefers this appeal from the direction of the Forum below that; directed the 3rd opposite party to repair the vehicle and deliver the same to the complainant in accordance with the directions to Ext. P9 report within 30 days. The opposite parties are also directed to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation. 2. In brief, the complainant purchased a Mahindra D1 3200 BSII Model vehicle from the 2nd opposite party. The 3rd opposite party is the authorized service centre of the 1st opposite party. The vehicle was registered with Reg. NO.KL;02-W-4223 with goods carriage permit. It is alleged that immediately after purchase the complainants driver noticed on driving that the vehicle when driven even at a norm...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Kumar Vs. State of Kerala Represented by Public Prosecutor and Ot ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-27-2012
P. Bhavadasan, J. 1. Under challenge is the order dated 8.8.2011 in Crl.M.P. No.4482 of 2008 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adoor, whereby the court below dismissed a private complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. 2. The private complaint was laid against two police officers. At the relevant time, the accused were Head Constable and Sub Inspector of Police, Panthalam respectively. On the basis of the first information statement given by the complainant, the first accused registered Crime No.498 of 2006. FIS was laid before the court and the court numbered it as C.C. No.1042 of 2006. The second accused had conducted the investigation, completed the same and laid charge before court. 3. The information which led to the registration of Crime No. 498 of 2006 given by the complainant was in respect of an incident that took place on 7.11.2006 at about 8 a.m. when the complainant was returning home, one Rajan, his son Kuttan and one Saji assaulted the complainant with a broken brick...
Tag this Judgment!P. Pavan Kumar Vs. State of Kerala Rep. by Its Secretary, Revenue Depa ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-27-2012
Ramachandran Nair, J. 1. This Writ Appeal is filed against judgment of the learned Single Judge upholding single assessment of 13 flats made up into 12 numbers as a single building in a flat complex. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellant and Government Pleader for respondents. 2. The facts leading to the controversy are the following. The appellant along with his two sisters, the joint owners of 54 cents of land, gave it to a builder under an agreement for development and construction of a residential flat complex comprising of 58 flats. As consideration for the grant, under the agreement Builder was bound to give appellant 13 flats made up into 12 numbers by combining two flats together for appellant's residence and two each flats to appellant's sisters and remaining 41 flats were allowed to be sold by the Builder to customers. When separate returns were filed for assessment of each and every flat separately, the Tahsildar assessed the 12 flats including one combination of...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »