Kerala Court February 2012 Judgments

Country Vaccations International Holiday Club and Another Vs. Ali Bara ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SMT. A. RADHA : MEMBER The opposite parties in C.C. 146/2010 in the CDRF, Kozhikode are the appellants before us in this appeal challenging the order to return Rs. 75,000/- along with a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and a cost of Rs. 1,000/- 2. The case of the respondent/complainant is that the complainant purchased a life membership of Country Vacation International Holiday Club on 15.11.2008 on payment of Rs. 75,000/- to the opposite parties. The opposite parties did not issue the membership card within 30 days as promised. The non receipt of the membership card, the complainants family had to stay as paying guest at Bombay during his vacation and had to spend Rs. 20,000/- Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice filed complaint to refund the membership fee and expenses incurred in Bombay. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted before us that the Forum below erred in passing the impugned order. The terms of membership were incorporated in the agreement and i...

The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Thiruvananthapuram and Another Vs. Sunaya ...

Court: Kerala

1. The State of Kerala seldom files a writ petition and not without reason in the instant case. The Lok Ayukta has declared the caste status of a person and has further directed the Tahsildar to act in terms of the finding so entered!!! 2. The Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil and another Vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and others [(1994) 6 SCC 241] has highlighted the necessity to streamline the procedure for the issuance of social status certificates, their scrutiny and other approval. The Supreme Court has even recently in Dayaram Vs. Sudhir Batham and others [2011 (11) SCALE 448] approved the guidelines laid down in Kumari Madhuri Patil's case as being intrinsic to the fulfilment of fundamental rights. The State of Kerala has enacted the Kerala (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1996 (the 'Act' for short) in tune with the judgment of the Supreme Court first quoted. An application for Community Certificate h...

The Rehabilitation Plantations Ltd. Puanalur Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2012(3)KLT41(SN)(C.No.42)

Ramachandran Nair, J. 1. Agricultural income is not liable to be assessed under the Central Income Tax Act by virtue of the exemption specifically provided under Section 10 of the Act. However when planters process or manufacture agricultural produce converting it into intermediary or final products for sale in the market, the income attributable to processing or manufacture becomes business income that attracts tax under the Central Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act for short). From the very beginning income from Tea was assessable partly as agricultural income and partly as business income and specific provision is provided in Rule 8 of the Central Income Tax Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) for assessment of income from Tea and for bifurcation of the same in the ratio given thereunder for the purpose of assessment under the Agricultural Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the AIT Act for short) and under the Central Act. In fact Rule 7 of ...

D. Rama Moorthy, Managing Director, S.S.D. Oil Mills Company Ltd. Chen ...

Court: Kerala

1. 'Delay' often comes through different corridors to rescue accused from the net of law in the way of criminal prosecution. It is utmost condemnable as well as agonizing, when the 'delay' comes through a corridor conveniently kept opened by the prosecution itself, deprives or denies a statutory right of defence of the accused to disprove prosecution evidence against him and thereby makes premature termination of the prosecution of a heinous crime affecting public health, inevitable to prevent abuse of the process of the court. 2. The petitioner is the Managing Director of an Oil Company Limited which is the manufacturer of well known edible oil by name "Supreme Vanaspathi". He is the 3rd accused in S.T.No.562/2003 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perambra. The above case was registered on a private complaint filed on 3.6.2003 by the 1st respondent herein, the Food Inspector, Perambara, alleging offences punishable under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7(...

K.K. Jayakumar and Another Vs. Joy Jose, Elavathingal House, Mission Q ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU, PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties in CC.1104/07 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur. The appellants were ex-parte before the Forum. In the circumstances and in view of the fact that the order cannot be treated as a considered one the same is set aside on condition that the opposite parties pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards costs to the complainant 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 file version if not filed and contest the matter. The matter stands posted before the Forum below on 27.3.12. The office will forward a copy of this order to the Forum below....

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Deepa Vimal

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SMT. A. RADHA : MEMBER Challenging the sustainability of the order passed by the CDRF, Ernakulam in CC No.245/2008 the opposite party preferred this appeal. The Forum below accepting the case of the complainant directed the appellant to pay Rs.5,00,000/- towards indemnification of loss along with interest @ 6% from the date of order till realization. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted before us that the Lower Forum is not justified in passing the order on the ground that there is an inordinate delay of 2 months and 22 days regarding the intimation of the accident causing breach of policy condition which is fatal in this case. The counsel contended that the Forum below had been taken away by the wrong reasoning that the delay in informing the insurance company about the accident was due to the delay in getting back the vehicle and also had given much gravity to the accident which resulted in the death of 3 persons. The counsel also highlighted the condition No.1 of the p...

Lorenzo Tiles and Others Vs. Rajanish

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SMT. A. RADHA : MEMBER The order of the CDRF, Kottayam in CC No. 114/11 is challenged in this appeal. We are called upon to hear the question of admission of this appeal. 2. The allegation of the complainant is regarding the defects in tiles purchased from the opposite parties and for damages. 3. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted before us that the opposite parties declared exparte due to non appearance. The Submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the opposite parties entrusted the case to the accountant to prosecute the litigation who left the office. The act of the accountant was beyond the control of the appellant and thus the circumstance caused the non prosecution of the case. The other contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the Forum below overlooked the defect without the expert opinion which is a mandate under the Consumer Protection Act. 4. On going through the order passed by the Forum below it is clear that ...

Tata Motors Ltd. and Another Vs. Roy Antony

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties/manufacturer and dealer respectively in CC.158/08 in the file of CDRF, Alappuzha. The appellants are under orders to refund the purchase price of the vehicle ie; Rs.8,16,412/- and also to pay compensation of Rs. 25,000/- with interest at 12% from the date of receipt of the order, if the amount is not paid within 45 days. 2. The case of the complainant is that the Tata Safari Dicor vehicle purchased from the opposite parties for a sum of Rs.8,16,412/- on 22.3.07 suffered from manufacturing defects and frequently the vehicle broke down in the middle of the run and he had to incur a lot of expenditure for repairs. He has sought for replacement of the vehicle or to pay the purchase price and compensation of Rs.5 lakh. 3. The opposite parties have contended that the complainant is not a consumer as he was using the vehicle for commercial purposes. It is also alleged that the required services as per the service ma...

Sndp Sakha Yogam Br.No.15, Komana, Ambalapuzha and Another Vs. Sri. Aj ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SMT. A. RADHA : MEMBER The opposite parties 1 and 3 are the appellants herein challenged the impugned order passed by the CDRF, Alappuzha in CC No. 111/2011. 2. On hearing the appeal on the question of admission the learned counsel for the appellants/opposite parties 1 and 3 submitted before us that after filing the version the appellants/opposite parties were not given opportunity to cross examine the complainant and tender evidence in support of their case. The counsel also submitted that a petition was filed before the Forum below on 28.10.2011 to re-open the evidence (copy of which is produced with Appeal Memorandum) was not considered and passed the order. It is also submitted that on the basis of the proof affidavit and Ext. A1 filed by the complainant the Forum below disposed of the case. 3. We find force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant. It is clear from the order of the Forum below that only version was filed by the opposite parties 1 and 3. The ...

Rajani Krishnakumar and Others Vs. M.K. Padmaja

Court: Kerala

1. Petitioner is the respondent in Election O.P. No 19 of 2010 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Wadakancherry. Her election as the returned candidate from Ward No.19 of West Thonnurkkara of Chelakkara Grama Panchayath is challenged under the above election petition for declaring it as void, by the respondent herein, who was the other contesting candidate from the Ward. Both the candidates obtained equal number of votes on counting and thereupon taking of lots, the petitioner was declared elected by the returning officer. Very many votes polled in favour of the petitioner in the election petition had been treated as invalid votes and some invalid votes had been treated as valid votes polled in favour of the petitioner/the returned candidate declared elected, is the case of the respondent/petitioner in the election petition imputing that counting of votes carried out was improper and it has vitiated and materially affected the result of the election. Petitioner in the election petition ...