(481) SIKKAS'S KWICK HANDLING SERVICES PVT. LTD. Vs. PARMANAND DAS MALPANI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-02-2024 Consumer Law — The complainant exported carpets to the USA through Sikka's Kwick Handling Services — The carpets arrived damaged, leading to a demand for compensation — Whether the complainant is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, and whether the District Forum in Jaipur had jurisdiction — Petitioner argues that the complainant is not a consumer as the transaction was for commercial purposes — The District Forum lacked jurisdiction, and no consideration was paid —Respondent states tha India Law Library Docid # 2418433
(482) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. NECTER LIFESCIENCES LIMITED ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-02-2024 Marine Insurance Act, 1963 - Sections 50 and 51 –Marine cargo insurance claim - The complainant company had insured a consignment of menthol crystal destined for Hong Kong under an open marine turnover policy with the appellant company - The consignment was shipped on the vessel ‘Northern Guard’, which experienced an explosion and fire off Mumbai’s coast on 06.04.2014 - The consignment was diverted to Mumbai and remained there until 26.08.2014, when it was transported on another vessel 'Hoechst India Law Library Docid # 2402578
(483) RAM KUMAR Vs. IFFCO TOKYO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 05-02-2024 Consumer Law — Theft of Vehicle — The complainant's insured truck was stolen, and the insurance claim was denied by the insurance company — The complainant sought compensation through various commissions — Whether the insurance company was justified in denying the claim based on delayed intimation and alleged negligence — The petitioner argued that the theft was genuine, the delay in intimation was not significant, and there was no negligence on their part — The insurance company contended that India Law Library Docid # 2416769
(484) SHAKUNTLA SINGH Vs. CHAIRMAN, DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 05-02-2024 Allotment - Allotment of Shop by DDA - The petitioner challenged the dismissal of her complaint by the State Commission and the District Forum, seeking possession of a shop-flat allotted to her by DDA under a self-financing scheme in 1984, at the original price, along with compensation and costs - The petitioner argued that she was a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and that DDA had defaulted in developing the project and demanded an exorbitant price for the shop-flat - The resp India Law Library Docid # 2402579
(485) SOMNATH PAUL Vs. URBAN LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 05-02-2024 Consumer Protection Act 1986 - Section 17 – Housing - Delay in Delivery - Further relief. -The appellant bought a flat from OP-3, who failed to complete the construction and hand over the possession - The appellant filed a consumer complaint against OP-3 and the landowners (OP-1 and OP-2) - The State Commission allowed the complaint against OP-3 and directed him to hand over the possession and pay compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- and litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a - The com India Law Library Docid # 2402580
(486) ANSHUMAN SINHA AND ANOTHER AND OTHER Vs. M/S. JAI PRAKASH ASSOCIATES LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-02-2024 Housing - Delay in delivery of Flat - Excess demand of super area charges - The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ruled that the opposite party was liable for delay in offering possession and ordered them to pay 9% p.a. interest on the total amount paid by the complainants from the expected date of delivery till the date of offer of possession - The Commission declined the claim of refund of excess area charges, as the complainants had agreed to pay for the increased super area as India Law Library Docid # 2402581
(487) RENAISSANCE RTW (ASIA) (P) LTD. Vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-01-2024 Consumer Law - Compensation for business loss - The complainant, Renaissance RTW (Asia) (P) Ltd., filed a complaint against Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Ltd., seeking the payment of insurance claim of US$ 166620.19, along with interest and compensation for business loss - The complainant exported garments to the United States and stored them in a bonded warehouse of M/s. Empire Warehousing and Distribution Inc., New Jersey - The garments were damaged due to Hurricane Sandy - The co India Law Library Docid # 2401809
(488) SURESH PHARMA AND OTHER Vs. SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 29-01-2024 Fire Insurance Claim - The complainants had filed a claim for Rs. 2,22,36,413/- for damages to stock and Rs. 14,00,000/- for damages to building due to a fire in their premises - The insurance company had repudiated the claim on the basis of a surveyor’s report and a forensic examination by Truth Labs, which concluded that the fire was not accidental but was caused by arson - The complainants challenged the repudiation, arguing that the cause of the fire was an electrical short circuit - The NCD India Law Library Docid # 2401805
(489) M. NAZEER AAHMED AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. KISHOR KUMAR GOKALDAS AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 29-01-2024 Consumer Law – Housing - The complainants booked an apartment, agreeing to pay Rs. 89,87,263, with a delivery date of 27.07.2007. They obtained a loan of Rs. 72 lakhs from the opposite party no.2. Alleging non-possession and unjust enrichment of Rs. 45,65,207 by opposite party no.1, the complainants filed a complaint. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed it, citing a lack of evidence for deliberate malafide actions by opposite party no.1 and the complainants' fai India Law Library Docid # 2401806
(490) ICICI BANK LIMITED Vs. NILIMA JAUHARI AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 29-01-2024 Consumer Law - Unfair practices - The complainant purchased a jewellery set through an advertisement by Gift 360, a partner of ICICI Bank, paying in instalments through her ICICI Bank credit card - However, the jewellery was not delivered - The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum ruled in the complainant's favor, directing ICICI Bank to pay Rs. 1,00,000 compensation - ICICI Bank's appeal to the State Commission was dismissed. In a revision petition, the National Commission partially agree India Law Library Docid # 2401807
(491) BANK OF BARODA Vs. M/S. KUMAR TRADING COMPANY AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 29-01-2024 Consumer Law – Theft - The case involved the denial of an insurance claim by insurance company for theft in the shop of respondent no.1, who held a cash credit limit with the petitioner - The insurance policy, valid from 06.05.2010 to 05.05.2011, covered stationery goods, gift items, and similar items stored at the shop - The theft included mobile phones, accessories, and sim cards, which were beyond the policy's coverage - The District Forum ordered payment of Rs. 10 lakh with interest, which t India Law Library Docid # 2401808
(492) CHIDIYA DEVI Vs. JODHPUR VIDYUT VITARAN NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-01-2024 Consumer Law — Electricity — The petitioner purchased an agricultural power connection — The connection was cut off without reason, and a large bill was later issued despite no electricity being provided — The main issues are the disconnection of the power supply, the issuance of a large bill, and the alleged unfair trade practices by the respondents — The petitioner argued that the power connection was wrongly disconnected, and the bill issued was incorrect — She sought correction of the bill, India Law Library Docid # 2416766
(493) KAMLA DEVI AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. AMBUJA CEMENT LIMITED AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Sections 13(1)(c) and 19 - Dismissal of a Consumer Complaint by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission - The complaint was against cement manufacturers and an authorized dealer, alleging the supply of inferior quality cement - The complainant claimed damages due to defects in the cement, causing leakage and peeling of mortar walls during construction - The State Commission dismissed the complaint, stating that the complainant failed to establish the supp India Law Library Docid # 2401801
(494) HDFC BANK LIMITED Vs. SYED MUSHIR ABBAS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-01-2024 Revision Petition - The petitioner, HDFC Bank, challenges the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's order, which partly upheld a previous decision favoring the complainant, Respondent had purchased a truck with a loan from the bank, but there were disputes leading to the repossession of the truck - The District Forum had partly allowed Respondent’s complaint, and the State Commission modified the order - The petitioner argues against the shift of liability and lack of evidence connectin India Law Library Docid # 2401802
(495) J. PRADEEP KUMAR Vs. MANISH UPADHYAY AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-01-2024 Condonation of Delay - Delay in filing the revision petition - The petitioner had filed the revision petition against the order of the Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission - The petitioner was appealing an ex-parte order by the District Consumer Forum, Ranga Reddy District, which directed him to repay a sum of Rs. 3,97,530/- along with interest - The petitioner argued that he had not received any summons or notices from the District Consumer Forum and that he had only learned a India Law Library Docid # 2401803
(496) ARUN RAMKRISHNA PAWADE Vs. SHARMAN PAINTS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-01-2024 Consumer Law – Defective PVC Pipes - The petitioner bought PVC pipes from the respondent for agricultural irrigation, but they cracked during use - Filing a consumer complaint for compensation, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum dismissed it, citing a lack of evidence and failure to request pipe testing - The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission upheld the decision, emphasizing the absence of evidence and testing applications - The petitioner contended that the St India Law Library Docid # 2401804
(497) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. DHINGRA RICE AND GENERAL MILLS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-01-2024 Consumer Law - Loss of goods in transit - The appellant is challenging a State Commission's order that granted the respondent Rs. 24,82,520 for the loss of goods in transit - The appellant had initially settled for Rs. 10,77,747 on a non-standard basis but claims a violation of policy terms - They argue that the State Commission erred in not acknowledging the policy violation, in relying on a laboratory test report, and in denying recovery of the balance amount - The appellant contends that the India Law Library Docid # 2401797
(498) ASSISTANT POST MASTER, ROORKEE AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. WESTERN PRECISION INSTRUMENT EMPORIUM[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-01-2024 Consumer Law – Misplace of goods in parcel - The petitioner, the Postal Department, contested an order from the State Commission that upheld the District Commission's decision in a consumer complaint - The complainant alleged that goods were misplaced from a parcel during transit, and despite multiple complaints, no action was taken - The lower fora awarded Rs. 25,000/- to the complainant - The petitioner argued that the complainant failed to disclose parcel details and did not insure it - They India Law Library Docid # 2401798
(499) SHYAM KISHANCHAND BHATIA THROUGH LRS. Vs. MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act 1986 - Section 21(b) - The complainant, who purchased a flat in 1993, faced issues with electricity bills and supply, leading to a consumer complaint - The District Forum partially allowed the complaint, but the State Commission set aside this order -The petitioner challenges this decision, arguing that they are a consumer under the Electricity Act - The State Commission's errors include disregarding evidence of bill payments and misinterpreting the complainant's consume India Law Library Docid # 2401799
(500) ANITA KUMAR Vs. STAR HEALTH AND ALLIED INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-01-2024 Consumer Law - Health insurance claim - Against an order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan, related to a health insurance claim - The petitioner challenges the denial of a claim by the insurance company, asserting that the illnesses were not pre-existing and that the cancellation of the policy was arbitrary - The District Forum initially allowed the complaint, but the State Commission set aside the order - The petitioner argues that the State Commission did not prope India Law Library Docid # 2401800