(561) RAVI DEVELOPMENTS Vs. VIJAY KUMAR BAJAJ AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeals against State Commission orders — Multiple appeals with similar facts and law can be disposed of by a common order. India Law Library Docid # 2403680
(562) STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. CAPT. JOSE HORMESE[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against order of State Commission — Enhancement of compensation — Appellant, a co-pilot, had insurance policy with Bajaj Allianz — Cheque for premium issued by appellant to insurer was returned by respondent bank for insufficient funds due to bank's failure to link Multi Option Deposits (MOD) to savings account — Insurer declared policy void — Appellant pursued matter with bank, which acknowledged its lapse — Appellant had to fly approximately India Law Library Docid # 2403681
(563) M/S. VOLVO INDIA PRIVATE LTD. Vs. M/S. KRISHNA CONSTRUCTION AND TRANSPORTATION[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Definition of 'consumer' — Commercial purpose — Self-employment — Explanation to Section 2(1)(d) defines 'commercial purpose' to exclude use of goods and services exclusively for earning livelihood by self-employment — Case law clarifies that "self-employment" connotes a person using machinery solely by himself and family members, distinct from employing workmen for trade — Burden of proof lies on the consumer to establish use solely for self-emp India Law Library Docid # 2403682
(564) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. TARA CHAND AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 21(b) Revision Petition Limited Jurisdiction Revisional jurisdiction of the National Commission is limited to cases where the State Commission has exercised jurisdiction not vested by law, failed to exercise vested jurisdiction, or acted illegally or with material irregularity. The National Commission cannot interfere with concurrent findings of fact by the District Forum and State Commission based on appreciation of evidence. India Law Library Docid # 2418429
(565) RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD Vs. MAHAVIR PRASAD TAK AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Condonation of Delay — Delay of 10 days in filing revision petition condoned based on reasons stated in application. India Law Library Docid # 2418430
(566) ESCORTS LTD. Vs. DEVA RAM AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 21(b) Revision Petition Delay in filing Condonation of Delay of one day in filing the revision petition was condoned by the bench. India Law Library Docid # 2418431
(567) VIMLA DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-03-2024 Insurance Act Disclosure of past medical history and existing policies in proposal form Non-disclosure or concealment of material facts can be a valid ground for repudiating an insurance claim. India Law Library Docid # 2418428
(568) NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. MRS. ABHA BANSAL[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-03-2024 Consumer Protection — Deficiency in Service — Mediclaim Policy — Renewal — Dishonoured cheque — Insurance company's failure to inform policyholder of dishonoured premium cheque for renewal — Policy lapsed due to procedural banking reasons — Previous policy's renewal fees cheque encashed — Insurance company liable for deficiency in service for not informing policyholder of cheque dishonour and potential policy lapse. India Law Library Docid # 2403356
(569) SRI SHIBNATH BANERJEE Vs. SRI ASHOKE ROY AND OTHERS[WEST BENGAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 17 — Complaint Case — Developers failed to hand over possession of flats and pay agreed consideration amount despite signing MoU and receiving building plan sanction — Complainant proved deficiency in service and entitlement to relief. India Law Library Docid # 2403357
(570) JATIN BANSAL Vs. M/S AMAZON RESELLER SERVICES PVT. LTD.[CHANDIGARH U.T. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Section 47(1)(a)(ii) and Section 2(46) — Unfair Contract — Pecuniary Jurisdiction — The State Commission has jurisdiction to entertain complaints against unfair contracts where the value of goods or services does not exceed ten crore rupees. An unfair contract is one that causes significant change in consumer rights, including imposing unreasonable charges or conditions. India Law Library Docid # 2403352
(571) PIARA SINGH RANA Vs. RAM KUMAR AGGARWAL[CHANDIGARH U.T. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-03-2024 The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 24-A — Limitation — Consumer complaint must be filed within two years from the date the cause of action arose — A complaint filed after this period can only be entertained if the complainant provides sufficient cause for the delay, with reasons for condoning the delay being recorded by the commission. India Law Library Docid # 2403353
(572) LALIT BINDAL Vs. S.K. VERMA AND OTHERS[CHANDIGARH U.T. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 47 — Revision Petition — Condonation of Delay — Sufficient Cause — Application for condonation of delay of 479 days in filing revision petition dismissed as petitioner failed to provide sufficient cause or day-to-day explanation for the delay. India Law Library Docid # 2403354
(573) AMIT CHADHA AND OTHER Vs. INTERGLOBE AVIATION LIMITED[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-03-2024 CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986 — SECTION 15 — APPEAL — CONDONATION OF DELAY — The appeal was filed after a delay of 305 days. The appellant cited change of counsel, his unavailability, misplacement of application for certified copy, and out-of-station reasons for the delay. India Law Library Docid # 2403355
(574) KARAMVEER KAUR Vs. GIAN CHAND RANGWALA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AND OTHERS[PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 17 — Complaint against Opposite Parties for medical negligence and deficiency in service — Complainant alleged that due to inaccurate reading of a Level 2 Ultrasound Scan, her child was born with Hydranencephaly — OPs denied allegations, stating all scans were normal and the condition was diagnosed post-birth — Complaint dismissed on merits as complainant failed to prove negligence. India Law Library Docid # 2403037
(575) SUNIL KUMAR MADAN (SINCE DECEASED) Vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND OTHERS[CHANDIGARH CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 05-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 41 — Appeal against District Commission order — Limitation period — Forty-five days from date of order — State Commission may entertain appeal after expiry if sufficient cause shown — Appellants sought condonation of 243 days delay. India Law Library Docid # 2403033
(576) KANWALPREET KAUR Vs. ICICI PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD AND OTHERS[CHANDIGARH CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 05-03-2024 Insurance Law — Group Loan Secure Policy — Death of Life Assured — Accidental vs. Suicide — Determination of cause of death based on police investigation reports and post-mortem examination — Police reports concluding accidental death were accepted by higher authorities and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, thus carrying weight. India Law Library Docid # 2403034
(577) SALLIMUDDIN M. SHAIKH Vs. M/S.K.K. CONSTRUCTION AND OTHERS[MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 17 — Consumer Complaint — Jurisdiction — Flat purchased for residential purpose — Complainant paid part of the consideration — Complainant qualifies as a 'consumer'. India Law Library Docid # 2403036
(578) ABHINITH KISHORE Vs. BHARATI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS[TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-03-2024 Insurance — Health Insurance — Claim Repudiation — Grounds — Congenital External and Cosmetic Surgery — Infantile Esotropia — Medical Opinion — Deficiency in Service — Consumer Protection — Appeal allowed. India Law Library Docid # 2403038
(579) ARIHANT CLOTHINGS (P) LIMITED Vs. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.[KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-03-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 15 — Appeal against District Commission order — Interpretation of contract terms — 'Ex-BLR' clause — Dispute arose over whether the seller (complainant) retained insurable interest in goods damaged during transit. The District Forum dismissed the complaint, holding the seller lost insurable interest due to the 'Ex-BLR' term. The appellate commission reviewed the case, examining the contract terms, correspondence, and surveyor reports to determine the passi India Law Library Docid # 2403035
(580) FORCE MOTORS LIMITED Vs. RAVINDRAN AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 29-02-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Scope of revisional jurisdiction — Limited to jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction or illegal/material irregularity in exercise of jurisdiction — Court should not ordinarily interfere with discretion exercised by lower courts. India Law Library Docid # 2402817