Kerala Court May 2012 Judgments

Kerala Hotel and Restaurant Association Vs. Thrissur District Consumer ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2012(3)KLT277

The petitioner in this writ petition is the Kerala Hotel and Restaurant Association represented by its Secretary. They are aggrieved by the action of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thrissur in entertaining a complaint filed by the Kerala Consumer Education Society, the 2nd respondent herein, complaining about the steep increase in prices of food articles in hotels and restaurants in Kerala and seeking appropriate directions to the Corporation, the District Collector and the District Supply Officer to regulate the prices of food articles in restaurants and hotels by appropriate classification of the hotels and fixing the prices of food articles to be sold in hotels and restaurants. Their contention is that Ext.P1 complaint is not maintainable at all under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. They would submit that Ext.P1 complaint is not filed by a consumer or on behalf of a consumer or consumers who only can file an application before the CDRF. Secondly they would conten...

Massimilano Latorre, Holder of Italian Passport Number Aa 1465972, (Ch ...

Court: Kerala

1. At about 4.30 P.M. on 15.2.2012, a fishing boat "St. Antony", registered in India, while fishing off the coast of Kerala, was fired at, from a passing ship. As a result of this, of the 11 fishermen who were onboard the boat, two of them, namely Valantine @ Jelestine aged 44 years and Ajeesh Pink, aged 20 years were killed instantaneously. Immediately, the boat returned to Neendakara and the owner of the boat gave First Information Statement before the third respondent, the Circle Inspector of Police, Neendakara, who recorded the same and registered a case as Crime No. 2 of 2012, copy of which is marked as Ext.P2 for murder punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the IPC). In Ext.P2 , it was alleged that while fishing at 33 Nautical Miles (NM) away from the police station, without any warning or alarm, there suddenly occurred repeated firing for about two minutes from a ship painted black and red. Since the assailants were not identified, the...

Kasha K. Malayan, Deputy Legal Advisior(Rtd) C.B.i. Vs. Standard Chart ...

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER The appellant is the complainant and respondents are opposite parties in C.C. No. 352/11 from its order dated 30.11.2011, preferred this appeal by the appellant/complainant. The appellant/complainant who filed the complaint before the Forum below and the complaint was closed by the Forum below. This appeal prefers from that impugned order before this commission. On this day this appeal came before this Commission for final hearing the appellant/complainant submitted that he was the registered owner of his Maruti Omni Car Registration No. K.L. 07/4D/8897. The first opposite party/ bank sanctioned the complaint. A Mileage Account limit up to Rs. 95,000/- The first opposite party used to collect monthly charges from the complainant on 25.7.2009. As demanded by the opposite parties the complainant paid a sum of Rs. 7,200/- towards full and final settlement of the account. The 2nd opposite party agreed the issue of N.O.C. and Form 35 within 10 days in which ...

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co.Ltd., Vs. Suresh Kumar

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Alappuzha in CC.67/10 dated 15.3.2010. The appellant is the opposite party and the respondent is the complainant in the above CC respectively. This order prefers under the direction of the Forum below that; the opposite parties directed to pay the complainant that the amount he insured for the patch up of his vehicle viz an amount of Rs.73000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of repudiation of the claim till the payment/recovery of the same. The opposite party is further directed to pay compensation of Rs.25000/- and cost of Rs.5000/- to the complainant. 2. The brief of the case is that the complainant is the owner of a Ford Fiesta car which insured with the appellant/3rd opposite party. On 18.12.09 the vehicle met with an accident and damaged. The complainant alleges that he informed the accident to the opposite party through his authorized agent. The vehicle was got repaired ...

K.L. Anthony Vs. M.J. Sebastian, Managing Partner

Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR : MEMBER This appeal is filed by the complainant in CC NO. 26/08 before the CDRF, Ernakulam who is aggrieved by the directions contained in the order dated: 18.11.2010 passed by the Forum below. As per the impugned order the complainant is directed to pay Rs.33,425/- to the opposite party and the opposite party is directed to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation to the complainant and on satisfaction of the two directions, the complainant is at liberty to withdraw the deposited sum of Rs.1,78,475/- from the Forum. 2. The complainant had approached the Forum stating that he had entrusted the work of erecting an elevator in his building and that the work had to be completed within 12 weeks from 27.03.2006 and that as per the advice of the opposite party, the complainant agreed to the new proposal and in spite of repeated requests, the opposite party failed to complete the work. It was his case that even though a lawyer notice was caused on 17.12.07, the opposite par...

M. Rugmini Vs. Director, Kerala Institute for Research, Training and D ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2012(3)KLT47(SN)(C.No.48); 2012(3)KHC30; 2012(3)ILR(Ker)161

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. The decision under the provisions of the Kerala (Scheduled Castes and scheduled Tribes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1996, that the appellant is not a member of a Scheduled Caste (Thandan community) is under challenge. Action to terminate her service in public employment is also recommended as per the impugned order. 2. Apart from eloquently challenging the findings on facts, it was argued on behalf of the appellant that the binding nature of the decision contained in O.S. No. 92 of 1991 of the Court of the Munsiff, Alathur, rendered with the State of Kerala and others on the array as defendants, has been unreasonably ignored while passing the impugned order. It is also pointed out that the effect of the judgment in O.P. No. 5603 of 1991 has also been overreached in issuing the impugned decision. 3. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader argued that the findings rendered by the civil court are without jurisdiction sin...

Dr. M.N.C. Bose, Director of Students Services, University of Kerala V ...

Court: Kerala

1. The petitioner, who was the Director of Students Services of the University of Kerala, was forced to retire at the age of 55 years on the ground that the post of Director of Students Services is a non-teaching post. He filed this writ petition before attaining 55 years of age claiming that he is entitled to continue till the age of 60 years since the duties and functions of the post held by him answers the definition of 'teacher' in the Kerala University Act. But since this Court did not grant any stay as such, the petitioner was forced to retire at the age of 55 years. But, this Court directed that the retirement of the petitioner would be subject to the result of the writ petition. The writ petition is now coming up for final hearing. 2. The Government of India appointed the Kothari Commission for recommending measures for enhancing the standards of University education in the country. The petitioner submits that the post of Director of Students Services was one recommended by the...

C.V. Abhilash Vs. Mahatma Gandhi University

Court: Kerala

The petitioner who possess B.Sc degree in Botany and M.Sc in Botany awarded by the Mahatma Gandhi University applied for admission to the B.Ed.degree course pursuant to Ext.P3 admission notification to the Principal, Mahatma Gandhi University College of Teacher Education, Vaikom for the year 2011-12. By Ext.P5 letter dated 25.7.2011, the Principal of the institution informed the petitioner that his application has been rejected as the mark list produced by him did not show the minimum marks required for qualifying in the practical examination in Part III, held in March 2004. Hence this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: (a) Call for the records leading to Ext.P5 letter and quash the same, by issuance of a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction: (b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, directing 2nd respondent, Controller of Examinations, to verify the accuracy of the Ext.P4 mark list, Practical-II Examinati...

O. Divya Vs. State of Kerala and Others

Court: Kerala

K.M. Joseph, J. The writ petition and the first appeal are filed by the same person. The writ petition came to be filed first. The prayers in the writ petition are as follows: “i) Issue a writ of certiorari, quashing Ext.P12 to the extent it holds “it is for the Authority which intends to act upon compassionate ground to consider the same”, and “the Civil Court can enforce only individual civil rights:; ii) Direct the 6th respondent to give the consent in terms of Clause 14 of G.O.(P) No.12/99/PandARD dt. 24.05.1999, forthwith. iii) Alternatively, grant a declaration that the petitioner is not liable to furnish the consent from the 6th respondent for securing compassionate appointment in terms of Clause 14 of G.O.(P) No.12/99/PandARD dated 24.05.1999; and direct the 4th respondent to waive the condition for furnishing the letter of consent from the 6th respondent for securing compassionate appointment in terms of the G.O. dt.24.05.1999, as prayed for in Ext.P7 r...

Biji Pothen, Residing at Karingadaveedu, Nedumkunnam Village Vs. Mrs. ...

Court: Kerala

Thomas P. Joseph, J. 1. Following are the substantial questions of law framed for a decision in these second appeals arising from the judgment and decree in A.S.Nos.130 of 2002 and 130(A) of 2002 of the Principal Sub Court, Kochi which arose from the judgment and decree in the suit and counter claim in O.S.No.527 of 2000 of the Principal Munsiff's Court, Kochi: i. Whether the finding of the courts below that relationship of plaintiff and defendants 2 and 3 is fiduciary in nature is justified in the facts and circumstances of the case? ii. Whether the legal conclusion arrived by the courts below on the basis of proved facts that Ext.B3 is vitiated by fraud and misrepresentation is correct, especially when the plaintiff, who is of full age and of sound mind executed that deed voluntarily, by which she was denuded of her property, is bound by her own act? iii. Whether the courts below are justified in setting aside Ext.B3, when the plaintiff failed to make out a case of fraud or misrepres...