(41) YOGENDRA VISHKARMA Vs. DR. OM PRAKASH[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-11-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Medical Negligence — Standard of Proof — Revision Petition against State Commission's order setting aside District Forum's finding of medical negligence during sinus surgery — Complainant lost vision in left eye post-surgery — The onus to prove medical negligence by cogent, convincing, and necessary medical evidence lies squarely on the claimant; it cannot be inferred from bald allegations or unexplained medical reports alone — A India Law Library Docid # 2437363
(42) STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. KODUDHALA JOJI REDDY AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-11-2025 Consumer Protection — Deficiency in Service — Fraudulent Electronic Transaction — ATM Card Fraud — Customer received a fraudulent call, shared new ATM card particulars (PIN) but immediately changed PIN after suspecting foul play; fraudulent withdrawals occurred soon after despite PIN change — Bank failed to explain how transactions occurred after PIN change or using the old (lost) ATM card — Held, fraudulent withdrawal of amount despite changing password/PIN points to India Law Library Docid # 2437364
(43) NARINDER VERMA AND OTHERS Vs. LALIT BINDAL AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-11-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 68 — Finality of Orders — Decree against party — When a decree of the District Commission has attained finality against a party (Respondent Lalit Bindal) through dismissal of Review Applications, Appeals (for non-deposit of statutory amount), and successive Revision Petitions, the State Commission acts with manifest illegality and lack of jurisdiction in entertaining subsequent Miscellaneous Applications filed by that party under the garb of a limited rema India Law Library Docid # 2437357
(44) DR. S.K. DEBNATH Vs. SAMINA KHATUN AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-11-2025 Consumer Protection — Medical Negligence — Diagnosis and Treatment — Sufficiency of evidence — Complaint alleging medical negligence and deficiency in service, including administering steroids and disproportionate overdoses of immunosuppressant drugs for Tinea Corporis (ring worm), leading to severe physical damage — State Commission allowed complaint ex-parte based on complaint allegations and discharge summary from another hospital — Discrepancies found upon appeal India Law Library Docid # 2437358
(45) M.K. AGGARWAL HOSIERY (P) LTD Vs. M/S NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-11-2025 Consumer Protection — Insurance Claim — Fire and Special Perils Policy — Admitted Liability, Part Payment and Discharge Voucher — Insurer admitted liability for loss due to fire and paid Rs. 5,49,45,964/- against a claim of Rs. 8,08,71,327/- — Complainant accepted part payment and executed a Discharge Voucher — Discharge Voucher execution: Execution of discharge voucher, even if allegedly under "coercion" due to severe financial distress (Bank NPA threat, heavy interest liability) India Law Library Docid # 2437346
(46) M/S VINOD OIL MILLS Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-11-2025 Consumer Protection — Insurance Claim — Marine Cargo Open Policy — Coverage for Theft, Pilferage, and Non-Delivery (TPND) — Loss of goods (oil) occurred while in transit; reported as theft and FIR lodged — Police submitted a final report for cancellation of FIR, suggesting misappropriation by the driver rather than theft — Insurance company repudiated the claim based on the cancellation report — Held, the factum of non-delivery and loss of goods is self-evident; the loss falls within India Law Library Docid # 2437345
(47) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. A. SUSHILA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Revision Petition — Motor Insurance — Vehicle Theft Claim — Repudiation Grounds — Insurance company repudiated claim on grounds of: (a) delay in lodging FIR (3 days); (b) delay in intimating the Insurance Company (22 months); and (c) driver's negligence (leaving ignition key). India Law Library Docid # 2437343
(48) M/S. PNB HOUSING FINANCE LTD. Vs. BHAVNA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 58(1)(b) — Deficiency in Service — Fixed Deposit (FDR) — Non-release of maturity amount — Where the Opposite Party (Housing Finance Ltd.) wrongfully withheld the maturity amount of a two-year FDR (deposited in 1998, maturing in 2000) for a prolonged period, citing an alleged lien marked due to a fraud intimated by bank, this constitutes deficiency in service, despite the absence of a lawful direction or order from a competent court; failure to India Law Library Docid # 2437344
(49) MAX LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHER Vs. DINESH KUMAR R. SHARMA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-11-2025 Insurance Law — Whole Life Participating Insurance Policy — Lapse and Surrender Value — Policy lapsed due to non-payment after premium paid for over seven years — Insured entitled to cash surrender value, which must be calculated based on policy terms (Clauses 12, 13, 14) — Insurer's calculation of surrender value at Rs. 11,00,042.96, based on actuarial considerations and factors like age and tenure of policy, upheld — State Commission erred in rejecting insurer's detailed calculation India Law Library Docid # 2437342
(50) GEETANJALI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL AND OTHERS Vs. KUMARI SWECHHA KOTHARI AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-11-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Medical Negligence and Deficiency in Service — ENT Surgery (Nasal Polypectomy) — Requirement of Pre-operative CT Scan — Conducting delicate polypectomy surgery near the brain periphery without obtaining a critical pre-operative CT scan report, despite the surgery being non-emergency and having serious, though rare, known complications (Subarachnoid Haemorrhage/Encephalocele), constitutes professional-medical negligence and a India Law Library Docid # 2437340
(51) M/S HOTEL BALLIAN'S Vs. DAIKIN AIR-CONDITIONING INDIA PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-11-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 2(7) — 'Consumer' — Commercial Purpose Exclusion — Hotel purchasing and installing Air Conditioning (AC) system (VRV/VRF) for use in hotel rooms and common areas — State Commission dismissed complaint holding that AC purchase for use in hotel business constitutes 'Commercial purpose' and thus appellant is not a 'Consumer' — Purchase of ACs by a hotel, not engaged in the business of sale/purchase of ACs, does not qualify as a India Law Library Docid # 2437341
(52) M/S. MAKEMYTRIP (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Vs. SARWAN KUMAR SHARMA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 28-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in service — Flight reschedulement — Duty to inform — Travel agent's role — Complainants booked flights with a travel agent (petitioner) for GoAir. Flight was rescheduled earlier. Complainants arrived at the airport based on the original booking time and missed the flight, incurring costs for new tickets. They filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service. The petitioner travel agent argued India Law Library Docid # 2434656
(53) TEJAS DUTTA AND OTHERS Vs. M/S. LOGIX HEIGHTS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 27-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 35(1)(a) and 35(1)(c) — Joint complaint — No statutory requirement to file an application for permission to file a joint complaint under Section 35(1)(a) in view of the decision in Brigade Enterprises Limited vs. Anil Kumar Virmani. India Law Library Docid # 2434660
(54) AAYSHA Vs. NOVAS PATHOLOGY LAB AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 24 & Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 68 — Finality of Orders — Orders passed by Consumer Forums become final if no appeal is preferred — An order, even if incorrect or without jurisdiction, must be set aside by the appropriate forum through a valid challenge, and cannot be ignored or India Law Library Docid # 2434658
(55) UTPAL KUMAR RAY Vs. SUB POST MASTER (HSG-I), NEW MARKET POST OFFICE, KOLKATA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revisional Jurisdiction — National Commission's power is limited and can only be exercised if the State Commission or District Forum has failed to exercise their jurisdiction, exercised it when not vested, or exceeded it due to illegality or material irregularity. Concurrent findings of fact by lower forums should not be interfered with unless they suffer from illegality, India Law Library Docid # 2434659
(56) DIVISIONAL REGIONAL MANAGER H.O NORTHERN RAILWAY FEROZEPUR AND ANOTHER Vs. SUJINDER SINGH[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 23-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 / Railways Act — Deficiency in Service — Delay in train service — Liability of railways — Railways are liable for compensation if delay is caused by planned maintenance and modernization work, as this is not a situation beyond their control — Passengers must be informed of such delays. India Law Library Docid # 2434657
(57) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. AMIT WALIA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 58(1)(b) — Revision Petition — Jurisdiction of National Commission — Revisional jurisdiction of the National Commission is limited and should only be exercised in cases where the State Commission has acted without jurisdiction, failed to exercise jurisdiction, or acted illegally or with material irregularity — National Commission cannot interfere with India Law Library Docid # 2434655
(58) M/S. KHANNA POLYRIB PVT. LTD. Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-10-2025 Insurance Law — Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy — Fire Occurred — Claim for loss of plant, building, machinery, and stocks — Dispute over assessment of loss and depreciation — Held, surveyor's exclusion of welding rods and embossing rolls (spares) lying near machinery was illogical as they also suffered damage in the fire. (Para India Law Library Docid # 2434652
(59) ARUN SHRIVASTAV Vs. U.P. POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Revision Petition — Reappreciation of evidence — National Commission’s jurisdiction in revision is limited and does not act as an appellate forum; it cannot reappreciate evidence unless there is jurisdictional error, material irregularity, or perversity in the findings of the lower fora. India Law Library Docid # 2434653
(60) ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SHEELA MEGHWAL[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 58(1)(b) — Revision Petition — Scope of Revisional Jurisdiction — National Commission's revisional jurisdiction is limited and should only be exercised when the lower forum has acted without jurisdiction, failed to exercise jurisdiction, or acted illegally or with material irregularity — Interference is warranted only if findings are against law, pleadings, evidence, or are perverse — India Law Library Docid # 2434654