Court : Kerala
K.M. Joseph, J. 1. ARBA No.40/2010 is directed against the order OP (Arb) No.21/2009 passed by the District Court, Kollam. The OP was filed under Sec.34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the appellants to set aside the arbitral award dated 14.1.2009. ARBA No.41/2010 is filed against the order passed in OP (Arb) 231/2008 filed by the respondent under Sec.9 of the Act to secure the award amount that was likely to be passed in his favour. 2. The respondent company which is incorporated at Singapore is doing business in species, edible oil, nut etc. The appellant is a cashew exporter. Purchase confirmation note dated 2.5.2007 containing admitted signature of the appellant was issued agreeing to export cashew kernel to the respondent. Likewise, confirmation note dated 25.5.2007 was admittedly issued by the appellant. So also, confirmation note dated 6.7.2007 also containing the admitted signature of the appellant was issued agreeing to exp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J. 1. The appeal arises from the award passed by the MACT, Thrissur in O.P.(MV)No.1545 of 2001 granting compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by the appellant in a road traffic accident. The grievance is that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is abysmally on the lower side and hence is sought to be enhanced, based on the grounds raised in the appeal. 2. The accident occurred on 01.04.2001, when an autorickshaw bearing No. KL.8-M/3049 (Goods Autorickshaw) in which the appellant was travelling, allegedly accompanying the goods, overturned causing serious injuries to him. In fact, one more person was travelling in the said vehicle and he also sustained injuries . The appellant filed O.P.(MV)No.1545 of 2001, whereas the other injured filed OP(MV)1991 of 2001.The autorickshaw, in fact, was owned by the second respondent, driven by the first respondent and insured by the third respondent. Attributing negligence solely on the driver of the autorickshaw, th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
1. Does the law reckon the poor folk travelling in an ill-fated plane and losing their lives in an accident, along with mighty rich, as the 'Children of a Lesser God', with regard to the eligibility to obtain the statutory compensation payable under the Carriage by Air Act 1972, as amended by the Carriage by Air (Amendment) Act, 2009 (Act 28 of 2009) incorporating the relevant provisions under the III Schedule in conformity with the Montreal Convention adopted on 28.05.1999, is the point involved. 2. The history of civil aviation industry in the world is said as traceable to the 18th century, when a hot air balloon was designed, proclaiming the starting of balloon flights, followed by construction of airships in the 19th century and the 'first flight' by the Wright Brothers in 1903. The concept of Air crafts and Air travel however was not alien to Indian society, in view of the reference to 'Pushpaka Vimana' in the 'Ramayana' by Saint Valmiki, though it was beyond the dreams of the res...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Basant, J. 1. Is the age of the dependent claimant irrelevant in a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act? Does the decision in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009 (6) SCC 121) followed by P.S. Somanathan v. District Insurance Officer (2011 (3) SCC 566) dispense with the requirement under settled law that the lower multiplier has to be taken into reckoning when different multipliers exist considering the age of the victim/deceased and dependent/claimant in a fatal accident? How are Tribunals to identify the multiplier in such cases under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (the Act hereinafter) in future? These questions are raised before us in this appeal by Sri. K.B. Arunkumar, the learned counsel for the appellant. 2. To the vitally relevant facts first. The appellant/claimant is a woman, aged 61 years. She claimed compensation for the loss suffered by her on account of the death of her son Jayan @ Jayesh Kumar in a motor accident which took place on 11.06....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
SHRI.M.V.VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal is preferred from the order dated 13.02.2004 passed by CDRF, Alappuzha in O.P.A.124/2002. The complaint therein was filed by the respondent herein against the appellant/opposite party alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party in effecting supply and sale of oil expeller and filter press. The complainant alleged that they paid the total consideration of Rs.1,37,383/- to the opposite party and that the opposite party failed to supply the machineries. The opposite party entered appearance and contended that the complainant is not a consumer as defined under Sec.2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and that the Forum below has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint in O.P.A.124/2002. The opposite party has also contended that the claim is barred by limitation and there was no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. 2. Before the Forum below Exts.A1 to A3 documents were produced from the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
1. O.P.(Crl)No.249 of 2015 is filed by the defacto complainant to have an expeditious disposal of the matter. Crl.M.C.No.5202 of 2015 is filed by the accused in C.C.No.432 of 2000 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Alathur, challenging Annexure-4 order. 2. On appearance of the accused before the court below, charges were framed against the accused on 09.08.2002. Annexure-2 shows that the charge has been read over and explained to the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty of the charges. The accused as well as the concerned judicial officer has affixed signatures in Annexure-2, which evidently shows that the charges were framed. 3. Later, out of 141 witnesses cited by the prosecution, PWs.1 to 35 were examined and Exts.P1 to P46 were marked. The evidence of the prosecution was closed on 05.03.2011. Thereafter, the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. No defence evidence was adduced. The matter was taken up for final hearing. At that juncture, the learned counsel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI & THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA FRIDAY,THE20H DAY OF FEBRUARY20151ST PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 31599 of 2009 (T) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S) : ------------------------ K.L.FRANCIS, AGED56YEARS, S/O.LASER, DRIVER (RETD), KSRTC, ADOOR AND RESIDING AT CHERIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHAYALODAM.P.O, EZHAMKULAM ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S) : --------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.2. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSRTC, ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, S.C THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON2801-2015, ALONG WITH W.P.(C).NO.7910 OF2012AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON200...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI & THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA FRIDAY,THE20H DAY OF FEBRUARY20151ST PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 31599 of 2009 (T) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S) : ------------------------ K.L.FRANCIS, AGED56YEARS, S/O.LASER, DRIVER (RETD), KSRTC, ADOOR AND RESIDING AT CHERIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHAYALODAM.P.O, EZHAMKULAM ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S) : --------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.2. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSRTC, ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, S.C THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON2801-2015, ALONG WITH W.P.(C).NO.7910 OF2012AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON200...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI & THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA FRIDAY,THE20H DAY OF FEBRUARY20151ST PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 31599 of 2009 (T) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S) : ------------------------ K.L.FRANCIS, AGED56YEARS, S/O.LASER, DRIVER (RETD), KSRTC, ADOOR AND RESIDING AT CHERIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHAYALODAM.P.O, EZHAMKULAM ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S) : --------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.2. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSRTC, ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, S.C THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON2801-2015, ALONG WITH W.P.(C).NO.7910 OF2012AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON200...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI & THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA FRIDAY,THE20H DAY OF FEBRUARY20151ST PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 31599 of 2009 (T) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S) : ------------------------ K.L.FRANCIS, AGED56YEARS, S/O.LASER, DRIVER (RETD), KSRTC, ADOOR AND RESIDING AT CHERIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHAYALODAM.P.O, EZHAMKULAM ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S) : --------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.2. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSRTC, ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, S.C THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON2801-2015, ALONG WITH W.P.(C).NO.7910 OF2012AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON200...
Tag this Judgment!