(1) M/S. DHEERAJ ASSOCIATES HAVING PLACE OF OFFICE AT, NEHRU MARG, PUNE- MAHARASHTRA Vs. DR. DEEPAK SITARAM DESAI SITARAM DESAI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 26-11-2024 Consumer Law — Housing — The complainant booked a flat with the appellant, paid the full amount, but received a smaller area than agreed — The State Commission ordered the appellant to compensate the complainant — Whether the complainant is a consumer under the Act, and whether the State Commission's order was justified — The complainant concealed facts, used the property commercially, and the State Commission violated natural justice by not considering the appellant's written submissions — The India Law Library Docid # 2420420
(2) M/S. NITESH COLOUR LAB Vs. M/S. JINDAL PHOTO FILM LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 26-11-2024 Consumer Law — Printing and Scanning Machines — Manufacturing Defects — Appellant purchased two digital mini lab frontier machines from respondent — The machines became defective shortly after purchase, leading to frequent complaints and financial losses — Whether the complainant qualifies as a "consumer" under the Consumer Protection Act and whether there was a manufacturing defect in the machines — The machines were defective, causing business losses — The complainant sought compensation and r India Law Library Docid # 2420421
(3) UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. DAYA SHANKER TIWAR[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 26-11-2024 Consumer Law — Theft — Luggage — Train Journey — The complainant's suitcase was stolen during a train journey — The District Forum directed the Railways to compensate 75% of the claimed amount — The State Commission upheld this decision — Whether the Railways are liable for the theft of unbooked luggage and if there was a deficiency in service — The Railways argued they are not responsible for unbooked luggage under Section 100 of the Railways Act and that the complainant was negligent — The com India Law Library Docid # 2420422
(4) HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY NOW, HARYANA SHEHRI VIKAS PRADHIKARAN AND OTHERS Vs. RADHA THAKUR AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 26-11-2024 Consumer Law — Housing — Allotment — The complainants were allotted plots by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) but faced issues with possession due to disputes and undeveloped plots — The main issue was the failure of HUDA to provide possession of the allotted plots, leading to claims of deficiency in service — HUDA argued that the alternative plots were ready for possession and that the complainants were avoiding taking possession — They also cited legal precedents and procedural o India Law Library Docid # 2420423
(5) NORTHERN RAILWAY RAILWAY STATION Vs. BALBIR SINGH[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 26-11-2024 Consumer Law — Theft — Luggage — Train Journey — The complainant's luggage was stolen during a train journey — Despite reporting the theft, the complainant received no redress from the railway authorities — Whether the railway was negligent and responsible for the theft of unbooked luggage, and whether the District Forum had jurisdiction — The railway argued that they were not responsible for unbooked luggage, the complaint was filed in the wrong jurisdiction, and there was no evidence of neglig India Law Library Docid # 2420424
(6) LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. SATWINDER KAUR[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 26-11-2024 Life Insurance Policy — The insured had a life insurance policy with a sum assured of Rs. 8,00,000 — He died of a heart attack on 01.02.2015 — The respondent, his nominee, filed a claim which was not responded to by the petitioners — Whether the insurance policy had lapsed on the date of the insured's death and if it was within the grace period for revival — The policy had lapsed due to non-payment of the premium by 24.01.2015, and the ECS was dishonored due to insufficient funds — The grace per India Law Library Docid # 2420425
(7) RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD. (RIICO) Vs. DWARKA PRASAD AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-11-2024 Consumer Law — Transfer Fees — The complainant purchased a plot and production unit — The OP (RIICO) demanded additional fees due to a discrepancy in the firm's name — Whether the complainant should pay the transfer fees and if the production unit was operational at the time of transfer — RIICO argued that the complainant did not obtain a No Objection Certificate and that the unit was inactive due to the name discrepancy — The complainant contended that the fees were unwarranted as the unit was India Law Library Docid # 2420383
(8) TAPAS KANTI SENGUPTA Vs. TATA MOTORS LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-11-2024 Consumer Law — Motor Vehicle — Manufacturing Defect — The petitioner purchased a Tata Nano car which had unsatisfactory mileage — Despite multiple attempts to resolve the issue, the problem persisted — Whether the car had a manufacturing defect and whether there was a deficiency in service by Tata Motors — The petitioner argued that the car's mileage was significantly lower than advertised and that this constituted a manufacturing defect and misrepresentation — Tata Motors argued that the car me India Law Library Docid # 2420414
(9) BANK OF BARODA AND ANOTHER Vs. SIKANDER ALI AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-11-2024 Consumer Law — Banking — Term Deposit — Complainant deposited funds in term deposits with Bank of Baroda, which were not renewed or paid out upon maturity — He alleged deficiency in service — Whether the bank was liable for non-renewal and non-payment of the term deposits and if the complainant was entitled to interest and compensation — The bank argued that there was no auto-renewal provision at the time, and the complainant did not submit the original receipts or renewal requests — The complai India Law Library Docid # 2420415
(10) KRISHNA KUMAR KUSHWAHA Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-11-2024 Consumer Law — Vehicle — Theft — The complainant's car, insured by United India Insurance, was allegedly stolen and later recovered — The insurance claim was denied, leading to a consumer complaint — Whether the denial of the insurance claim constitutes a deficiency in service and if the theft and accident claims were fabricated — The complainant argued that the car was stolen, the insurance claim was unjustly denied, and sought compensation for damages — The insurance company claimed the theft India Law Library Docid # 2420416
(11) ONE SCHOOL GOA Vs. VIBHA SINGH[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-11-2024 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — The main issue is whether the delay of 325 days in filing the appeal should be condoned, considering the circumstances and the Supreme Court's extension of limitation periods due to the Covid-19 pandemic — The petitioner argued that the delay was not intentional and was caused by administrative duties and the Covid-19 lockdown — They claimed to have a strong case on merit and sought condonation of the delay — The respondent supported the India Law Library Docid # 2420417
(12) BHARTI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. MOOL CHAND LALWANI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-11-2024 Consumer Law — Vehicle — Theft — The complainant's vehicle was insured with Bharti Axa General Insurance and was stolen on 23.01.2014 — The insurance claim was repudiated on the grounds that the vehicle was left unattended with the key in it — Whether leaving the key in the vehicle constituted a fundamental breach of the insurance policy, justifying the repudiation of the claim — The insurance company argued that the complainant's negligence in leaving the key in the vehicle breached the policy India Law Library Docid # 2420418
(13) MUKESH KUMAR KAUSHAL Vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-11-2024 Consumer Law — Critical illness claim — The petitioner filed a complaint against ICICI Lombard General Insurance for denying his critical illness claim — He had a policy covering critical illness and was diagnosed with CAD (Single Vessel Disease) — Whether the petitioner's condition qualifies as a critical illness under the insurance policy terms and if the claim was settled as per the policy — The petitioner argued that his condition qualifies as a critical illness and that the insurer wrongly India Law Library Docid # 2420419
(14) FAST ENGINEERS Vs. DEEPSHIKHA KALA SANSTHAN[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2024 Consumer Law — Non Completion of Installation — The complainant paid Rs. 18,50,000 to appellant for installing an LG Multi V4 VRF AC System — The installation was not completed, leading to a complaint for refund and compensation — Whether the complainant qualifies as a "consumer" under the Consumer Protection Act and whether there was a deficiency in service — The complainant argued that the installation was incomplete despite full payment and sought a refund, interest, and compensation for ment India Law Library Docid # 2420379
(15) ABDUL GAGOOR Vs. JOSE K.V[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2024 Consumer Law — Housing — Substandard Construction — The complainant entered into an agreement with the opposite party (OP) to construct a villa — The complainant paid Rs. 12.25 lakhs but found the construction substandard and incomplete — He sought a refund of Rs. 8.35 lakhs — Whether the OP used substandard materials, had the right to halt construction due to delayed payments, and if the complainant is entitled to a refund of Rs. 8.35 lakhs — The OP argued that delays were due to the complainan India Law Library Docid # 2420380
(16) STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2024 Consumer Law — Electricity — Demand for electricity dues — Time Barred — SBI, the complainant, received a demand notice for Rs. 5,81,893 for electricity dues from May 2013 to July 2015 — SBI argued that the demand was time-barred under Section 56(2) of the Indian Electricity Act — Whether the demand for electricity dues was time-barred and if there was a deficiency in service by the electricity provider — SBI contended that the demand was issued after a significant delay and was thus barred by l India Law Library Docid # 2420381
(17) DR. HARISH GUPTA Vs. KUMARI KRITIKA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2024 Consumer Law — Medical Negligence — The case involves ‘K’ who developed cataracts allegedly due to prolonged use of eye drops prescribed by doctor — She initially consulted Dr. ‘H’ who referred her to Dr. ‘T’ — The main issue is whether the doctors were negligent in their treatment, leading to cataracts — Dr. ‘H’ argued he only referred ‘K’ to Dr. ‘T’ and did not prescribe any treatment — Dr. ‘T’ claimed he advised against contact lens use and prescribed standard treatment — Respondent argued th India Law Library Docid # 2420382
(18) DCB BANK LIMITED Vs. MR. AJOY KUMAR MEHTA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-11-2024 Consumer Law — Banking Services — Unauthorized withdrawals — The complainants' account was hacked, resulting in unauthorized withdrawals of $53,000 — They alleged that the bank was negligent in handling their account and sought compensation — Whether the complainants are considered consumers under the Consumer Protection Act, and whether the bank was deficient in its services — The complainants argued that the bank failed to verify the fraudulent transactions and India Law Library Docid # 2420377
(19) CHANDRAPRATAP SINGH BAIS Vs. PRAKRIYA PRABHARI (PROCESS IN-CHARGE) AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-11-2024 Consumer Law — Substandard soya bean seeds — Seed failed to germinate — Crop Loss — Compensation — Whether the petitioners could prove the sowing of the seeds and the resulting crop failure, and whether they were entitled to compensation — The seeds were tested and found substandard — Despite sowing, the seeds did not germinate, causing financial loss — Lack of evidence for the actual sowing of seeds and the specific land used — No expert evidence on seed germination — The Commission found suffi India Law Library Docid # 2420378
(20) MOHD. MUKHTAR Vs. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-11-2024 Consumer Law — Motor Vehicle Insurance — The complainant's car, insured for R. 4,43,800, was involved in an accident — The insurance company paid Rs. 2,00,000, which the complainant accepted under duress — Whether the insurance company was absolved of liability after the complainant signed the consent letter — The consent letter was signed under duress and lacks legal validity — The complainant is entitled to the full insured amount due to total loss — The complainant accepted the settlement vol India Law Library Docid # 2420375