(541) VIRENDER AGGARWAL Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-01-2024 The present Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/ Complainant under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (“the Act”) against the impugned order dated 06.07.2017, passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttarakhand, Dehradun (‘the State Commission’) in First Appeal No. 191/2011 wherein the State Commission allowed the Appeal filed by the Respondent No.1/OP-1 against the order dated 29.08.2011 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes India Law Library Docid # 2401710
(542) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. BIR DEI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-01-2024 National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has upheld an order from the Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC) directing United India Insurance Company Ltd (UIICL) to pay Rs 2,17,344 to Dr Inder Jit Singh for the damage to his vehicle in an accident - The complainant's vehicle was insured with UIICL from May 2012 to May 2013, and the driver died in the accident - The insurance company repudiated the claim, citing the invalidity of the driver's driving India Law Library Docid # 2401711
(543) DR. AJAY SHARDA Vs. RAKESH GULATI AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-01-2024 Medical Negligence – While undergoing treatment for abdominal pain - The State Commission found prima facie evidence of negligence on the petitioner and directed him to pay Rs. 8 lakhs to the complainants, along with interest at 9% per annum - The insurance company UIIC was jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount - The Appellant and UIIC have filed separate revision petitions challenging the order - The Appellant argues that the State Commission erred in finding him guilty w India Law Library Docid # 2401712
(544) TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. SURENDER KUMAR AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-01-2024 Car Insurance - The dispute relates to a claim filed by the Respondent, who is the insured owner of a Fiat Grande Punto car - The Petitioner's car was involved in an accident on 2nd December 2013, leading to a complaint from the Respondent - The Petitioner contested the claim, arguing that the accident was not reported within 14 days and their surveyor's assessment was less than 75% of the insured value - The District Forum dismissed the complaint, but the State Commission allowed the appeal and India Law Library Docid # 2401713
(545) M/S. PIONEER DYEING PVT. LTD. Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-01-2024 Fire Insurance Claim - Fire broke in the godown - Quantum of the claim - The claim was initially rejected by the OP on the grounds of breach of policy conditions - The complainant then filed a consumer complaint with the State Commission - The State Commission partially allowed the complaint, but the complainant appealed this decision to the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) - The NCDRC remanded the case back to the State Commission to determine the quantum of the claim - India Law Library Docid # 2401701
(546) SARJU RAM (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SHYAM LAL Vs. SENIOR BRANCH MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-01-2024 Consumer Law – Insurance Claim - Fundamental breach of the insurance policy - The petitioner's father, Sarju Ram, owned a vehicle that was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company from 23.04.2011 to 22.04.2012- The vehicle met with an accident on 21.06.2011 and was totally damaged - The petitioner filed a claim with the insurance company, but it was repudiated on the ground that the policy was renewed in the name of a deceased person - District Forum allowed the petitioner's complaint and di India Law Library Docid # 2401702
(547) ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. M/S. DUROFLEX PRIVATE LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-01-2024 The present First Appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (“the Act”) against the Order dated 10.12.2014 passed by the learned Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Chennai (hereinafter referred to as “the State Commission”), in Consumer Complaint No. 57 of 2012, wherein the Complaint filed by the Respondent was partly allowed. India Law Library Docid # 2401692
(548) M/S MITTAL TOWNSHIP PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. GURPREET SINGH GILL AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-01-2024 The present First Appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (“the Act”) against the Order dated 04.05.2018 passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (“the State Commission”), in CC No. 444 of 2017, wherein the learned State Commission allowed the Complaint filed by the Respondents herein. India Law Library Docid # 2401693
(549) UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. FOOD COURT THE COMPANY GARDEN SOCIETY AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-01-2024 The present First Appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (“the Act”) against the Order dated 31.05.2017 passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttarakhand (“the State Commission”), in Consumer Complaint No. 10 of 2014, wherein the Complaint filed by the Complainants (Respondents No.1 & herein) was partly allowed. India Law Library Docid # 2401694
(550) PAWAN SALUJA Vs. IMPERIAL HOUSING VENTURES PVT. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-01-2024 The present First Appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (“the Act”) against the Order dated 25.07.2019 passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (“the State Commission”), in Consumer Complaint No. 863 of 2017, wherein the Complaint was dismissed. India Law Library Docid # 2401695
(551) NARAYAN LAL GUJAR Vs. CIGNA TTK HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-01-2024 The present First Appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (“the Act”) against the Order dated 06.12.2018 passed by the learned Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur (“the State Commission”), in Consumer Complaint No. 127 of 2016, wherein the Complaint filed by the Complainant (Appellant herein) was dismissed. India Law Library Docid # 2401696
(552) PROVAT KUMAR PAL Vs. DR. NILAABHA BHADURI AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-01-2024 Two appeals have been filed, one appeal (FA/183/2019) by the complainant alleging deficient and disproportionate compensation having been awarded by the State Commission in spite of the findings of medical negligence against the doctor and the hospital, and the other (FA394/2019) has been filed by the doctor running the hospital to set aside the impugned order dated 28.12.2018 in its entirety. India Law Library Docid # 2401697
(553) LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA Vs. RAMA MISHRA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-01-2024 The present First Appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (“the Act”) against the Order dated 14.05.2019 passed by the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UP, Lucknow (“the State Commission”), in Consumer Complaint No. 299 of 2017 whereby the State Commission partly allowed the Complaint. India Law Library Docid # 2401698
(554) BIRLA SUN LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. SUMAN DEVI AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-01-2024 Life Insurance Policy - The policyholder, ‘M’ passed away and his wife filed a claim with the insurance company - The insurance company denied the claim, stating that the policy was not in force at the time of death – Respondent then filed a complaint with the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission - The Commission ruled in favor of Respondent and ordered the insurance company to pay the sum assured under the policy, along with interest and compensation - The insurance company appealed India Law Library Docid # 2401699
(555) CONSUMERS WALFARE ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. VASUNDHARA BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-01-2024 Consumer Law – Housing - ‘K' had booked a flat with Vasundhara Builders in 1995 and made an initial payment of Rs. 1 lakh - However, the construction of the flat was delayed for several years - 'K’ repeatedly contacted the builder about the delay, but the builder did not provide any satisfactory explanation - In 2000, ‘K’ received a demand letter from Kandur Corporation, a different company, asking him to pay installments for the flat. – ‘K’ contacted Vasundhara Builders and was told that Kandur India Law Library Docid # 2401700
(556) M/S. HARISH PROCESSORS PVT. LTD. Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-01-2024 In the present Appeal, the learned State Commission passed the Impugned Order on 26.09.2022. The limitation for filing the First Appeal before this Commission is 30 days from the date of the Impugned Order i.e. 26.09.2022. As the Appellant received the copy of the impugned order on 13.10.2022, the period of limitation lapsed on 11.11.2022. However, the present Appeal has been filed on 28.04.2023. Thus, there is 167 days delay in filing the Appeal. India Law Library Docid # 2401688
(557) A. ILYAS AHMED Vs. THE EXPORT CREDIT GUARANTEE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-01-2024 The present Original Petition (OP) has been filed by the Complainant against Opposite Parties (OPs) as detailed above, inter alia praying for directions to the OPs to pay to the Complainant an amount of Rs. 1,36,32,761/- (Rupees One Crore thirty six lakhs thirty two thousand seven hundred sixty one only). India Law Library Docid # 2401689
(558) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. BELABEN HARISH KUMAR GANDHI AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-01-2024 The present two Revision Petitions (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner against Respondent(s) as detailed above, under section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the common order dated 14.02.2019 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahemdabad, Gujarat (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’), in First Appeal (FA) No.524-525/2017 in which order dated 28.07.2017 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ahemdabad India Law Library Docid # 2401690
(559) JAHIR KHAN Vs. ASHOK LEYLAND AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-01-2024 The present Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (the “Act”) against impugned order dated 26.03.2016, passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pandri, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ( ‘State Commission’) in First Appeal No. FA/2016/26 & FA/2016/33, wherein the Appeals filed by the Respondents/ OPs was partly allowed and setting aside the Order dated 07.01.2016, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum India Law Library Docid # 2401691
(560) SATBIR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. RAHEJA DEVELOPERS LIMITED AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-01-2024 Housing - The complainants filed a consumer complaint against the Opposite Parties, namely, Raheja Developers Limited and ICICI Bank Limited, for deficiency in service - The complainants had booked a plot of land in a residential project, Raheja Aranya City - Phase-2, situated in Gurugram, Haryana - The complainants had availed of a subvention scheme for the purchase of the plot -Under the terms of the agreement to sale and the memorandum of understanding, the complainants were entitled to cance India Law Library Docid # 2401686