Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: calcutta police act 1866 Court: kerala state consumer disputes redressal commission scdrc thiruvananthapuram Year: 2011 Page 1 of about 22 results (0.028 seconds)

Nov 04 2011 (TRI)

Adv. T. Joseph Chairman, Rural Development Centre Vs. the Secretary, K ...

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on : Nov-04-2011

..... to pay this amount from his own pocket. there is no doubt that it is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service as per the provisions of the consumer protection act. the complainant is only liable to pay rs. 9,240 + rs. 3,85 = (total amount 9,625/-) the opposite parties have no right to collect rs. 27,098/-. as per ..... . b1 and b2 documents. the counsel for the opposite parties submitted that the assessment was done by the opposite parties as per the section 126(5) (6) of electricity amendment act 2007 an assessment at the rate equal to two times the tariff applicable for a period of 12 months immediately proceeding the date of inspection must be imposed. the counsel ..... equal to 2 times with tariff applicable for a period of 12 months immediately proceeding the date of inspection much imposed, as per section 126 (5) (6) of electricity amendment act, 2007. the fora taken a view that the assessment of the opposite party is correct, hence the impugned bill issued by them is also upheld by the forum below. 6 ..... .27,908/- has been issued out of previous enmity is false. on 18.9.09 , a surprise inspection was conducted by the authorized office under section 126 of the electricity act and it is found that consumer no. 7764 has an unauthorized load of 7kw and a mahazer was prepared and copy of the same was given to the employees present .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 28 2011 (TRI)

Life Insurance Corporation of India Branch Office, Town Hall Road, Thr ...

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on : Jul-28-2011

..... murder but is a murder simplicitor. since the police reports, and the nature of the killing by stopping a vehicle, dragging out the victim by a number of persons indicate nothing but a murder ..... vadakkathara ward committee and the above said murdered reji was a citu worker and both were rivals and belonged to rival political parties. from the police records, it can be seen that the dominant intention was to kill the life assured. such killing is a premeditated murder and not an accidental ..... request of the opposite party to submit necessary forms for consideration the claim. the complainant was provided with police records and reports in crime no. 303/2005 of viyyur police station and from the police reports, it was clearly revealed that the life assured was murdered in relation with the murder of another ..... inconnection with the recovery of the weapon under sec. 27 of the evidence act, or if any other circumstantial evidence already collected by the police. on the basis of this investigation of the murder case of the insured person. the police investigation team prepared the ext. r5 charge sheet. it is on the ..... basis of mere available data in their case diary. all of this evidence are became an evidence as per the evidence act only if it will be proved through the criminal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 2011 (TRI)

K.K. Zacharia and Another Vs. the Station Manager, Royal Jordanian and ...

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on : Apr-12-2011

..... essential medicines etc. worth more than rs. 1.25 lakhs. the same contained many valuable gift articles also. the loss was immediately reported at the nearest police out post since the ground handling agency m/s. egypt air was found closed. the complainants had to buy the dress materials and other articles afresh. alleging ..... air foundations are operating through out the day in the airport. the complainants have not produced any record as to the complaint alleged by filed before the police. in the absence of the pir the opposite parties had difficulties to arrange for tracing of the missing baggage. the baggage tab was also not handed ..... not disclosed to the opposite parties. they have not made any declaration as to the contents of the baggage vide the provisions in the carriage by air act, 1972. the contention that the baggage contained articles worth more than rs. 1.25 lakhs is disputed. the offer to pay 400 u.s. dollars ..... for quite a long time. also stands not discredited in the cross examination of pw1. it is their case that the police authorities in the nearest station and was not able to understand english and with the help of another person the complainants somehow registered the complaint. the ..... police authorities shouted at them when they asked for acknowledgment and then they left the place. we find that there is nothing to dis .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 28 2011 (TRI)

Dr. M.H. Rahimkutty Vs. the Southern Railway, Represented by General M ...

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on : Jul-28-2011

..... the complainant has failed to prove his case with cogent evidence. the complainant is not have case that he had informed the matter to the police or given any complaint in writing to the opposite party even at a later stage. the ext. p1 is the complaint dated 20.9.01 ..... that the view of the forum below is not accordance with the provisions of law and evidence. it is against the spirit of the consumer protection act, a special enactment passed by the parliament for the protection of consumers and cost free and speedy justice. a consumer friendly attitude is highly necessary ..... contention taken by the counsel for the respondent/opposite party is that this complaint is not maintainable as per the provisions of the c.p. act even though the railway is having their own tribunal to redress the very same dispute. this argument is not legally sustainable. the railway claims tribunal ..... the forum is not having any legal jurisdiction to entertain this dispute established by the ministry of railway . even though as per the railway tribunals act is a statutory body to entertain this dispute established by the ministry of railway. another contention raised by the counsel for the opposite party is ..... keeping the lock of the window properly the complainant preferred a complaint before the forum below for the relief under the provisions of c.p. act, the complaint who sustained huge loss and mental pain. hence the complaint. the opposite parties filed written version and contended that the complainant is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 24 2011 (TRI)

The Kerala State Electricity Board Secretary and Another Vs. V.Y. Sree ...

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on : Jun-24-2011

..... appearance and filed written version denying the alleged deficiency in service. they contended that the demand for rs.8,283/- was made in accordance with the provisions of the electricity act and the conditions of supply of electrical energy. thus, the opposite parties prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 2. before the forum below, the complainant was examined as pw1 and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 30 2011 (TRI)

E. Jinson, the Assistant Engineer,electrical Section, Kanjiramkulam an ...

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on : Jun-30-2011

shri. s. chandra mohan nair : member the order dated 15.5.10 of cdrf, thiruvananthapuram in c.c. 15/04 is being assailed in this appeal by the opposite parties who are under directions to cancel the notice dated 16.12.03 issued by them and to change the tariff from lt vii a to lt vii b from 11.12.99 on receipt of application from the complainant and to return/adjust the excess amount if any paid after 11.12.99 in the future bills. the complainant has approached the forum stating that he is a consumer of the opposite parties and that due to non payment of an additional bill his service was disconnected on 11.12.99 and he filed an o.p. before the forum below which was dismissed and that he could pay the amount only on 23.7.03 and subsequently he was issued 3 bills and the last bill was for rs. 44,460/- and further that his service was disconnected for non payment of the said bill. it is also his case that he has paid the disputed bill of rs. 11,762/- on 23.7.2003 and that he was not liable to pay the charges levied by the opposite parties during the period from 1/99 to 5/03. it is his further case that the opposite parties were charging under lt vii a tarif whereas they ought to have charged only under lt vii b as his connected load was below 1000 watts. alleging deficiency in service the complaint was filed praying for directions to cancel the bill contained in notice dated 16.12.03 and also to change the tariff with further prayers for compensation and costs. the opposite .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 2011 (TRI)

Sheela and Others Vs. Lic of India, Rep. by the Zonal Manager and Othe ...

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on : Nov-24-2011

..... is not vested with such authority to mis represent facts (mrs. maniluxmi patel vs. hindustan corporative insurance society ltd. and another a. i. r 1962 , calcutta , 625). 21. the contention that the deceased before admitted into the policy had undergone medical examinations and the doctor of the l.i.c. have certified that ..... recommending lives for insurance. in the letter issued by the divisional manager dtd. 20.1.2005, it has been held that the development officer has acted in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the corporation. it is pointed out that he should have made all reasonable enquiries with regard to the ..... accepting the proposal. 7. the l.i.c. is entitled to repudiate the claim and declare the policy void as per section 45 of the insurance act, 1932. the complainant had taken up the matter with divisional manager, chennai and the matter was considered by the claim review committee consisting of a retired ..... caused to him on 6.3.2002. the assured died by drowning due to an accident. 3. the complainants are in very poor circumstances. the act of the opposite parties repudiating the claim is illegal. it is further alleged that the opposite parties 5 and 6/development officer and agent respectively are the ..... in the form for joining in the policy. the 6th opposite party/agent was fully aware of the above fact. he brought a proposal form and acting as the agent of the l.i.c. enquired and collected the details and asked the deceased to put his signatures where ??x marks are put .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 2011 (TRI)

Dr. Sunil Kumar, Indira Dandhi Co-operative Hospital Vs. P. Mohanan an ...

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on : Sep-26-2011

..... analysis report. it is to be noted that 3rd opposite party recommended for further investigations for confirming the aforesaid report. the appellant/1st opposite party doctor was not expected to act upon ext.b1 report suggesting a diagnosis of lymphoma or leukemia. b1 report suggested for other confirmatory tests/examinations. appellant/1st opposite party before conducting such confirmatory tests made a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 29 2011 (TRI)

The Manager, Hongkong and Shangai, Banking Corporation Ltd.(Hsbc), Pal ...

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on : Jun-29-2011

..... case and the evidence adduced by the appellant and respondent. it is seeing that there is harassment from the part of the appellant bank/complainant. it is not a legal act and which account to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service but at the same time it is seeing that the complainant was having dues to the amount which is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 28 2011 (TRI)

Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co.Ltd. and Others Vs. Sm ...

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

Decided on : Dec-28-2011

justice sri. k.r. udayabhanu : president the appellants are the opposite parties 1 to 3/bajaj allianz life insurance co. in cc.nos.167/09 and 168/09 in the file of cdrf, pathanamthitta. the appellants are under orders to refund a sum of rs.4,50,000/- each to the complainants in the respective ccs and to pay a compensation of rs.15000/- and cost of rs.5000/- with interest at 10% from the date of order. the complainants are the wife(cc.167/09) and the husband(cc.168/09) in the respective complaints. 2. it is the case that they had joined in the life insurance policy under unit plus scheme of the opposite parties/appellants. the total premium was rs.4,50,000/-, to be paid in 3 yearly payments at the rate of rs.1,50,000/- each. the 4th opposite party/field officer of the insurance company used to collected the premium of cheques and issue receipts. accordingly the cheques were issued in the name of the 4th opposite party and 4th opposite party used to remit the premium and the company used to issue receipts. receipts for rs.1,50,000/- each in the name of the complainants dated 18.8.07 were issued by the pthanamthitta branch of the insurance company. the original policy bond was surrendered for complete withdrawal of the assured sum in the month of june 2009. the request was acknowledged by mr.dileep.r.panicker, asst.branch supervisor. subsequently on 22.7.09 duplicate copy of the policy documents were returned with an endorsement that the original policy bond was not received. .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //