(501) DR. MAHTAB SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. RAMPRASTHA PROMOTERS DEVELOPERS (PVT) LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-02-2024 Housing – Delay in delivery of Flat - The complainants filed a case against the opposite parties for failing to deliver the possession of a flat booked by them the stipulated time and sought refund of the amount paid by them with interest and compensation - The opposite parties contested the case on the grounds that the delay was due to reasons beyond their control (force majeure), the complainants were not consumers, the dispute was subject to arbitration, and the National Commission did not ha India Law Library Docid # 2402575
(502) SHIV KUMAR MISHRA Vs. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-02-2024 Consumer Law — Loss of eye sight — Petitioner filed a claim for personal accident insurance after losing his eyesight in an accident — Respondent-Insurance company rejected the claim, citing discrepancies and lack of evidence — Whether the loss of eyesight was due to the accident and if the insurance claim was valid — The petitioner argued that the loss of eyesight was solely due to the accident and presented a disability certificate as evidence — The respondent contended that the loss of eyesig India Law Library Docid # 2416768
(503) DR. JOY'S HOSPITAL FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN AND ANOTHER Vs. SABYMOL C.M. ALIAS SABYMOL NAZEER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-02-2024 The present Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (the “Act”) against impugned order dated 20.12.2018, passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kerala (‘for short ‘State Commission’) in First Appeal No. 313 of 2014. In this appeal, the Petitioners/OPs appeal was partly allowed and was disposed of with modification by reducing compensation on account of mental agony amount to Rs.3,00,000/- instead of Rs.5,00, India Law Library Docid # 2402573
(504) DIVISIONAL MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA Vs. SHRIRAJ AMAR MAHAGAONKAR AND OTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-02-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 21(b) - The nominee claimed the insurance amount after the policyholder’s death, but the company repudiated the claim on the ground of non-disclosure of material facts, such as diabetes and cardiac disease, by the policyholder at the time of obtaining the policies - The nominee filed a complaint before the District Forum, which partly allowed the complaint and directed the company to pay the insurance amount with interest and compensation - The company app India Law Library Docid # 2402569
(505) SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES AND ANOTHER Vs. PRAMIL KUMAR PANDA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-02-2024 Indira Vikas Patra Rules, 1986 - Rule 7(2) - Consumer Protection Act, 2019 - Section 58(1)(b) - Indira Vikas Patra (IVP) - Revisional Jurisdiction - The respondent/complainant claimed to have purchased Indira Vikas Patra (IVP) worth Rs. 6,50,000/- which were lost and sought payment of maturity value from the petitioner/opposite party, the postal authorities - The District Forum and the State Commission allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner/opposite party to pay the maturity value o India Law Library Docid # 2402570
(506) C.M.O.H., M.R. BANGUR HOSPITAL AND ANOTHER Vs. TANMOY MAJHI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-02-2024 Medical Negligence – Permanent physical disability of the complainant - The District Forum partly allowed the complaint and directed the OP-2 (Dr. Deb) to pay Rs. 9 lakhs as compensation and Rs. 20,000 as litigation cost to the complainant - The State Commission dismissed the appeal filed by the OP-2 and upheld the District Forum order - The OPs filed a revision petition before the National Commission, challenging the orders of the lower fora on various grounds, such as limitation, maintainabili India Law Library Docid # 2402571
(507) STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. GOVIND LAL SHARMA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-02-2024 Cosumer Law — Banking Services — Unauthorized withdrawals — The complainant reported unauthorized withdrawals totaling Rs. 3,60,000 from his SBI account — Despite having his ATM card, the transactions occurred without his knowledge — The main issue was whether there was a deficiency in service by the bank, leading to the unauthorized withdrawals — SBI argued that the withdrawals were not their fault, citing the Banking Ombudsman's closure of the complaint, lack of CCTV footage, and the possibili India Law Library Docid # 2418432
(508) 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
(509) 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
(510) 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
(511) 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
(512) 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
(513) 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
(514) 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
(515) 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
(516) 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
(517) 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
(518) 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
(519) 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
(520) 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