Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: kerala state consumer disputes redressal commission scdrc thiruvananthapuram Page 167 of about 1,664 results (0.140 seconds)

Sep 19 2007 (TRI)

Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. and Others Vs. S.Sathish Kumar

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from order dated. 28th August 2002 passed by the CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram in OP.No.400/99. The complainant in the said OP.No.400/99 was preferred by the respondent herein as complainant against the appellant as opposite parties claiming compensation of Rs.15000/- for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in granting a loan of Rs.75000/-. The opposite parties denied the alleged claim of the deficiency in service and contended that the complainant is not a consumer coming within the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act and that the complainant failed to affix his signature on the agreement for availing the loan applied for. But the lower forum accepted the case of the complainant and thereby the opposite parties are directed to pay compensation of Rs.15000/- for the deficiency in service. The opposite parties are also made liable to pay Rs.1000/- towards cost. Hence the present appeal. 2. Befor...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 2007 (TRI)

Rethy Gangadharan Vs. Industiral Development Bank of India

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated 21.10.02 passed by the CDRF, Kozhikode in OP.No.525/01. The complaint in OP.525/01 was preferred by the appellant as complainant against the respondent as Opposite party claiming compensation on the ground deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in not paying the interest at the rate 18% on the principal amount of Rs.5,00,000/- from 13.4.2000 till 17.10.01. The lower forum dismissed the aforesaid complaint on the ground that the claim for interest at 18% is unsustainable and that the complainant is only entitled to get 7% interest which the opposite party had already paid on 17.10.01. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order pass by the lower forum present appeal is preferred by the complainant therein. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant/complainant and respondent/opposite party. The learned counsel for the appellant argued the appeal on the grounds urged in the appeal memor...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 2007 (TRI)

V.P. Kochagasty Vs. the Chairman, Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an appeal preferred from the order dated.16.12.2002 passed by the CDRF, Ernakulam in OP.163/02. The appellants herein filed the complaint in OP.163/02 claiming compensation for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party (respondent herein) in collecting service charges for three outstation cheques submitted to the bank for collection/ encashment. The lower forum dismissed the complaint in the said OP.163/02 on the ground that the opposite party bank has proceeded only in accordance with the circular issued by the bank with respect to the collection of charges for rendering service to the customers for forwarding their outstation cheques for collection and encashment. The lower forum has also directed the complainant to pay cost of Rs.250/- to the opposite party bank for unnecessarily preferring the complaint in OP.163/02. Aggrieved by the said order the present appeal is preferred. 2. We heard the appellant who appeared i...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 2007 (TRI)

M/S. Aima Manpower Services Vs. Lincy Sam

Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram

SRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN: JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated.18.5.2007 passed by the CDRF, Ernakulam in CC.No.48/07. The complaint in CC.No.48/07 was preferred by the complainant/Respondent as against the appellant as opposite party seeking refund of Rs.26400/- which was remitted by her as Registration fee with the opposite party for getting job placement Nurse in the U.K. The case of the complainant is that there occurred change in circumstance for getting VISA from the U.K.Government. It is admitted by the opposite party as DW1 that there occurred some change in the circumstance due to change made by the U.K.Government in their Labour and Laws and U.K.Government has made some restrictions regarding issuance of VISA to nursing personal. It is an admitted fact that category of nurses has been removed from the list of skill shortage occupation with respect to VISA formalities. This circumstance would make it clear that it was not so easy as before for nurses...

Tag this Judgment!


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