(181) M/S. ROLEX HOSIERY PVT. LTD. Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-08-2024 Consumer Law — Repudiation of Claim — Complaint against National Insurance Company Ltd. for not paying the insurance claim after two fire incidents at their premises in Gurgaon — Whether the fire-affected premises were covered under the insurance policy and if the claim was wrongly repudiated by the insurance company — The petitioner argued that the entire premises were insured and that the insurance company unreasonably delayed and eventually denied the claim — The respondent contended that the India Law Library Docid # 2418263
(182) M/S CHAUSANA PHARMACEUTICALS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. BANK OF BARODA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-08-2024 Consumer Law — Banking — Non-Renewal of Insurance Policy — Complainant filed a complaint against Bank of Baroda for not renewing an insurance policy, leading to financial losses after a burglary — Whether the bank was responsible for renewing the insurance policy and lodging the insurance claim — Complainant argues that the bank failed to renew the insurance policy and lodge the claim, causing business losses and mental agony — The bank argued it was not obligated to renew the insurance policy o India Law Library Docid # 2418261
(183) TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED Vs. LEENA JAIN AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-08-2024 Consumer — Fire Insurance Claim — The case involves a fire insurance claim by Complainant against Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd — The insurance company repudiated the claim, alleging misrepresentation by the complainants — Whether the insurance company is liable to pay the assessed amount despite allegations of misrepresentation by the complainants — The complainants argued that the insurance company should pay the amount assessed by its surveyor, as the fire incident and loss were not disp India Law Library Docid # 2418262
(184) M/S. PUJA HOME APPLIANCES PATNER PUNAM CHAND GUPTA Vs. BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-08-2024 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — Petitioner filed two revision petitions against the State Commission's order dated 03.11.2020 — The petitions were delayed by 1204 days — Whether the delay in filing the revision petitions should be condoned — The delay was due to the respondent's objection in October 2023, leading to the filing of separate petitions — The petitioner argued that the delay was not intentional — The respondent objected to the delay, arguing that the petitio India Law Library Docid # 2418264
(185) THOMAS COOK (INDIA) LTD. Vs. VIPENDER MANN AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-08-2024 Consumer Law — Foreign Tour Package — Delay in Visa processing — The complainants booked a "Magical Europe" tour package with Thomas Cook, but due to delays in visa processing, the trip was altered to a UK-only package — The complainants were dissatisfied with the new arrangements — Whether the delay in obtaining visas was attributable to Thomas Cook and whether Thomas Cook failed to honor specific demands in the new package — Thomas Cook argued that the delay was due to the complainants' late s India Law Library Docid # 2418265
(186) PARKHYATT GOA RESORT & SPA AND ANOTHER Vs. VINAY RAJKUMAR RAJPAL[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-08-2024 Consumer Law — Hotel Services — Bathroom Design — The complainant slipped and fell in the bathroom of appellant’s resort/hotel resulting in injuries — He claimed the bathroom design was defective and sought compensation — Whether the bathroom design was defective and if there was negligence on the part of the hotel — The hotel argued that the bathroom design was approved by authorities, no prior complaints were made, and the complainant did not raise concerns initially — The complainant argued t India Law Library Docid # 2418266
(187) MR. J. ZAHID AHMAD Vs. JMB MOTORS AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-08-2024 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — The appellant filed an appeal against the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's order dismissing his complaint — He sought a refund of Rs. 22,37,184 with interest, Rs. 75 lakhs as compensation, and costs — The main issue was whether the delay in filing the appeal (53 days) could be condoned — The appellant argued that the delay was due to the misplacement of the file by his counsel and the time taken to receive documents from the India Law Library Docid # 2418270
(188) SKODA AUTO VOLKSWAGEN INDIA PVT. LTD. Vs. AMIT ANJANI PODDAR AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-08-2024 Consumer Law — Complainant booked a Volkswagen Vento car, which was delivered with 273 km on the odometer and previously invoiced — He claimed it was a second-hand car and sought replacement or refund — Whether the car delivered was second-hand and if there was a deficiency in service or unfair trade practices by the dealers and Volkswagen — The car was second-hand, previously invoiced, and had run 273 km — The petitioner faced delays and issues in registration and fulfillment of promises — The India Law Library Docid # 2418267
(189) DISHARI HEALTH POINT AND ANOTHER Vs. DOYOJAN BIBI AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-08-2024 Consumer Law — Medical Negligence — Wrong Test Report — The complainant was admitted to petitioner’s hospital for fever and weakness — She was diagnosed as HIV positive, but subsequent tests at another hospital confirmed she was not HIV positive — Whether there was medical negligence or deficiency in service by petitioner’s hospital in conducting the HIV screening test — The screening test was conducted as per medical norms, and the final result was HIV non-reactive — The complainant's mental ag India Law Library Docid # 2418268
(190) CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER NEHRU SATABDI CENTRAL HOSPITAL AND OTHERS Vs. PUJA SAHU[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-08-2024 Consumer Law — Medical Negligence — Improper Treatment — The complainant suffered a snake bite and was treated at petitioner’s Hospital — Due to alleged improper treatment, she developed gangrene, leading to the amputation of her right thumb — Whether there was medical negligence and deficiency in service by the hospital and its doctors in treating the complainant — The hospital argued that the gangrene was caused by a black thread tied by the complainant's parents, not by their treatment — They India Law Library Docid # 2418269
(191) INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION (IATA) Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-08-2024 Consumer Law — Special Contingency Insurance Policy — The International Air Transport Association (IATA) filed complaints against United India Insurance Company for rejecting claims related to defaults by IATA's agents under a Special Contingency Insurance Policy — Whether the insurance company was justified in rejecting the claims based on the surveyor's report and other grounds — IATA argued that the insurance company had an obligation to indemnify them for the losses due to agents' defaults a India Law Library Docid # 2418272
(192) SHARDABEN ASHOKBHAI LATHIYA Vs. M/S RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-08-2024 Consumer Law — Insurance Claim — Non-disclosure of pre-existing policies — Multiple insurance claims primarily involving the non-disclosure of pre-existing policies and the nature of the insureds' deaths — The main issues include whether the non-disclosure of pre-existing policies constitutes suppression of material facts and whether the deaths were accidental or felonious acts of murder — The petitioners argued that the insurance claims were valid and that there was no suppression of material f India Law Library Docid # 2418271
(193) APOLLO MUNICH HEALTH INSURANCE Vs. BALJIT SINGH[HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-08-2024 Consumer Law — Health Insurance Policy — Respondent’s son had a knee injury treated during the insurance policy period — The insurer, Apollo Munich Health Insurance, denied the claim, citing the injury as pre-existing — Whether the insurer rightly repudiated the claim based on the pre-existing condition clause — The insurer argued that the knee injury was pre-existing and not disclosed in the policy enrollment form, thus not covered under the policy —Respondent claimed the insurer's denial was u India Law Library Docid # 2417708
(194) LIVING MEDIA INDIA LIMITED Vs. HMB SINHA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-08-2024 Consumer Law — The complainant alleged that petitioner failed to deliver subscribed issues of Reader's Digest and did not provide promised gifts and participation in a sweepstakes — The main issues were non-receipt of subscribed magazine issues, non-receipt of mystery gifts, and exclusion from the sweepstakes — The petitioner argued that the complainant did not pay for the subscription, hence the issues were not sent — They also claimed that the sweepstakes was a chance-based event and not a ser India Law Library Docid # 2417698
(195) PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs. SUSHAM LATA SEHGAL[PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-08-2024 Consumer Law — Banking — FDR — The complainant, a senior citizen, invested in Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) with Punjab National Bank (PNB) but was not paid the correct interest rate as promised — The bank withheld a substantial amount of interest without her consent — Whether PNB is liable to pay the contracted rate of interest (9.5%) mentioned on the FDRs or the lower rate (9%) as per their circulars — The complainant argued that the bank must pay the interest rate mentioned on the FDRs and co India Law Library Docid # 2417711
(196) IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. MANJEET KAUR AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-08-2024 Sankat Haran Kisan Gramin Bima Yojana — Policy Commencement — The insurance policy commenced on the 31st day after the purchase of fertilizer, which was 12.02.2011 — The accident occurred on 06.02.2011, before the policy started — The State Commission ruled that the cause of action was the death, which occurred after the policy commenced, making the claim valid — Contra Proferentem Rule — The court applied this rule, favoring the claimant due to ambiguity in the policy terms — The revision peti India Law Library Docid # 2417697
(197) ASHOK KUMAR PRAJAPAT Vs. DIRECTOR, HARYANA STATE TRANSPORT[CHANDIGARH CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-08-2024 Consumer Law — Importance of protecting public health in public transport and the responsibilities of transport operators in ensuring safe and comfortable travel environments for their passengers — Prohibition of Smoking in Public Transport — The Commission established that smoking within public transport, specifically buses, is a violation of both public health regulations and consumer rights — It cited The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Pro India Law Library Docid # 2417700
(198) AMARJEET SINGH GADHOK AND OTHERS Vs. RAHEJA DEVELOPERS LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-08-2024 Consumer Law — Housing — Delayed Possession — Eleven complainants filed against Raheja Developers for delayed possession that booked between 2009-2011 — Delay in construction and possession, compensation for delay, and refund requests — Complainants seek possession, compensation for delay, refund if possession isn't given, and compensation for mental agony and litigation costs — Delay due to external factors like infrastructure issues and government policies — Claimed no negligence and argued th India Law Library Docid # 2416979
(199) PRABODH KUMAR SHUKLA Vs. RAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-08-2024 Consumer Law — Housing — Allotment — The case involves related to the allotment of plots — The complainants argue that they were entitled to plots at old rates, but the Raipur Development Authority demanded current market rates — Whether the complainants are entitled to plots at old rates or must pay current market rates — The complainants argue that they paid the amount long ago and are entitled to plots at old rates — They also claim that the delay was due to the authority's internal issues — India Law Library Docid # 2416980
(200) BIHAR STATE HOUSING BOARD AND OTHERS Vs. AWADHESH PANDEY[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-08-2024 Consumer Law — The Bihar State Housing Board was accused of not providing necessary documents and information regarding outstanding dues to the complainant, leading to a complaint in 1998 — The main issue was the deficiency in service by the Housing Board, including the non-provision of receipts and details of outstanding payments — The Housing Board argued that the delay in payment of 33 installments justified their actions and sought restoration of their appeal dismissed in 2015 — The responde India Law Library Docid # 2416981