Kerala Court February 2014 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Ahammad Kabeer Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN FRIDAY,THE28H DAY OF FEBRUARY20149TH PHALGUNA, 1935 Crl.MC.No. 1155 of 2014 () --------------------------- MC.NO. 720/2013 OF SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLLAM ---------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------------- AHAMMAD KABEER,S/O.ALIYARUKUNJU, MELECHARUVILA VEEDU, ELAMPAZHANNOOR, KADAKKAL, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENTS : ----------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT, REP. THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.2. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, KOLLAM.PIN-691 001 R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SAREENA GEORGE THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2802-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts Crl.MC.No. 1155 of 2014 () -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES: ----------------------...
M. Alavi Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN FRIDAY,THE28H DAY OF FEBRUARY20149TH PHALGUNA, 1935 Crl.MC.No. 1086 of 2014 () --------------------------- CC.NO. 231/2012 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, MANJERI CRIME NO. 965/2012 OF MANJERI POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM DISTRICT ------------------------------------- PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ M. ALAVI, AGED47YEARS, S/O.AHAMMED HAJI, MECHERI HOUSE, IRUMPUZHI,ANAKKAYAM VILLAGE, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.ARUNKUMAR RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT : -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI- 682 031.2. ABDU RASAQUE, S/O.AHAMMED, VALIYAKATH HOUSE, MUTTIPALAM, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM -676 121. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. HYMA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2...
BenjamIn Samuel Vs. Antony Leo
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH FRIDAY,THE28H DAY OF FEBRUARY20149TH PHALGUNA, 1935 OP(C).No. 611 of 2014 (O) -------------------------- IN IA NO. 2693/2013 IN OS3782012 of MUNSIFF COURT, PERUMBAVOOR PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- 1. BENJAMIN SAMUEL, AGED56YEARS S/O. LATE CHERIAN SAMUEL, BUSINESS EXECUTIVE RESIDING AT PEEDIYAKKAL HOUSE, INDUSTRIAL NAGAR P.O. CHETIPUZHA VILLAGE, CHANGANASSERY-686 101 KOTTAYAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SAMUEL PEEDIYAKKAL AGED59YEARS, S/O. CHERIAN SAMUEL, RESIDING AT PEEDIYAKKAL HOUSE KUNNU ROAD, ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM-683 572.2. THOMAS ANTONY AGED54YEARS S/O. THOMAS THOMAS, BUSINESS EXECUTIVE RESIDING AT MULAKUPPADAM HOUSE INDUSTRIAL NAGAR P.O., CHETIPUZHA VILLAGE CHANGANASSERY-686 101, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SAMUEL PEEDIYAKKAL, AGED59YEARS S/O. CHERIAN SAMUEL, RESIDING AT PEEDIYAKKAL HOUSE KUNNU ROAD, ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM-68...
M/S. Ifb Industries Ltd. Vs. M.S. Viswambaran
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
A. Radha : Member Aggrieved by the Order passed by the CDRF, Malappuram in C.C.No.330/12 the opposite party preferred this appeal. The Forum Below allowed the complaint and directed to pay Rs.33,383/- as compensation and Rs.2000/- for mental agony. 2. It is the case of the complainant that the complainant purchased an IFB washing machine for Rs.25,200/- + Rs.200/- as delivery charges on 11/06/2003 from the opposite party. The machine started complaints and the mechanic advised to replace certain machine parts. The machine was having two years warranty and the complainant had to pay Rs.6,396/- on 30/07/2008 for spare parts. Thereafter the defects continued and on 24/06/2011 entered into an AMC No.957 remitted Rs.1,886/- and on 15/08/2012 AMC renewed. During this period the machine was having vibration and huge sound. Thereafter one mechanic came and advised to replace certain parts and was unable to repair the washing machine to the satisfaction of the complainant. It is stated in the c...
The Nileshwar Block Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. E.V. Varghes ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
P.Q. Barkath Ali : President This is an appeal filed by the opposite party in CC.345/11 on the file of CDRF, Kasaragod under section 15 of Consumer Protection Act challenging the order of the Forum dated, March 12, 2013 directing the opposite party to return to the complainant his title deeds within one month. 2. The case of the complainant as detailed in the complaint and as testified by him as PW1 before the Forum in brief is this:- Complainant availed a loan of Rs.75,000/- from the opposite party society for the construction of his house on March 15, 1997 by mortgaging his property having an extent of 40 cents. Complainant executed a registered mortgage deed infavour of the society and deposited with them the original purchase certificate and Kuzhikanam assignment deed. Complainant defaulted repayment of the loan amount. Opposite party initiated recovery proceedings through Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kasaragod as ARC No.110/2001. On September 26, 2001 Assistant R...
Satheesh Lal Vs. Hdfc Standard Life Insurance, Kadappakada, Represente ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
A. Radha : Member Dis-satisfied by the Order passed by the CDRF, Thiruvanthapuram in C.C.No.117/09 the complainant came up in appeal. The Forum Below allowed the complaint in part. 2. Attracted by the representations made by the opposite party the complainant joined a Life Insurance Policy œYoung Star Plan Policy? of the opposite party. The period of the policy was 20 years commencing from 06/06/2006 and the annual premium was Rs.80,000/- to be paid in 2 half yearly instalments of Rs.40,000/- each. The complainant paid two instalments in 2006 and from 2007 based on mutual understanding the terms of payment was fixed as quarterly instalments @ Rs.20,000/- each to be paid in March, June, September and December 2007. He also paid two instalments in March and June 2008 at Rs.20,000/- each and the total amount comes to Rs.2 Lakhs remitted by the complainant till 2008. While the next instalment fell due in September 2008 it is alleged by the complainant that the opposite parties failed...
The Proprietor, Inspro Marketing, United Shopping Complex, Poothole, T ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
A. Radha : Member This appeal is preferred by opposite party against the order in C.C.No.85/2012 on the file of CDRF, Malappuram. 2. It is the case of the complainant that he purchased a Remote Controlled Gate System with colour Desk Top Access controlled video door phone from the opposite party for a total value of Rs.45,000/-. The system installed on 21/06/2010 and within two months the system became defective. Though the system was rectified by a mechanic the battery system became totally exhausted. It is informed by the opposite party that the company manufactured the remote control system closed down and the replacement could not be made. The complaint is filed to refund the price of the system with 15% interest and for Rs.10,000/- as damages for the deficiency in service along with cost of Rs.10,000/-. 3. Though the notice was served, the opposite party remained absent. 4. The evidence consisted of the affidavit of the complainant and Exbts. A1 to A3 were marked in support of the...
Jacob, Manager, Riya Travel and Tours, Tara Towers, Sasthamangalam, Tv ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
Common Judgment: P.Q. Barkath Ali : President Both these appeals under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 arise out of the order of CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram in CC.68/12 dated, January 31, 2013. Therefore both these appeals are disposed of by a common order. Appeal No.185/13 is filed by the first opposite party and Appeal No.304/13 is filed by the 2nd opposite party. 2. The case of the complainants as testified by the 2nd complainant as PW1 and as detailed in the complaint before the Forum in brief is this:- Complainants are husband and wife and are senior citizens. They have booked flight tickets in the airlines of British Airways to travel to USA and back on visit visa. The ticket was booked on behalf of the complainants by 2nd opposite party from the first opposite party travel agency. The date of departure was September 8, 2009 and the date of return was March 03, 2010. The tickets were for travelling from Banglore to Seattle in USA and back. When they reached Seattle a...
Sub Postmaster, Kattakampal P.O. and Others Vs. K.K. Rathy
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
P.Q. Barkath Ali : President This is an appeal filed by the opposite parties 1 to 3 in CC.692/09 on the file of CDRF, Thrissur under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 challenging the order of the Forum dated, February 28, 2012 directing the opposite parties to pay the maturity amount of Ext.P1 Kissan Vikas Pathra Rs.20,000/- with interest and a cost of Rs.1000/-. 2. The case of the complainant as testified by him as PW1 before the Forum and as detailed in the complaint in brief is this:- Complainant deposited Rs.10,000/- with first opposite party Kattakampal post office in a 5 year Kissan Vikas Pathra Scheme. The first opposite party the postmaster, Kattukampal post office issued the certificate Ext.P1 with registration No.213 dated, September 15, 2003. When the complainant claimed maturity amount of Rs.20,000/- after 5 years the first opposite party rejected the claim stating that maturity period of Kissan Vikas Pathra Scheme has been changed to 8 years. Complainant c...
The Thrissur District Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Another Vs. Ramachand ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
P.Q. Barkath Ali: President This is an appeal filed by the opposite parties in CC 54/09 on the file of CDRF, Thrissur, challenging the order of the Forum dated 13/12/2012. 2. The respondent/complainant filed the complaint before the Forum claiming refund of Rs.8,317/- collected as penal interest from him by the opposite parties. 3. 1st opposite party is District Co-operative Bank, Thrissur and 2nd opposite party is his Branch Manager at Vadakkekkara Branch. The opposite parties remained absent before the Forum and they were set exparte by the Forum. Therefore accepting proof affidavit filed by the complainant and Ext. P1 to P4 produced, the Forum allowed by the complainant. The opposite parties have challenged the said order of the Forum in this appeal. 4. In this appeal the appellant/opposite parties contended that they are entitled to collect penal interest and as their counsel was not able to reach the Court in time they were set exparte by the Forum. Taking into consideration the n...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »