ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(641) ECGC INDIA LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EXPORT CREDIT GUARANTEE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.) Vs. SAR AUTO PRODUCTS LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 23-11-2023
Consumer Law – Insurance Policy - Repudiation of the claim – Repudiation on the ground of delay could be taking a hypertechnical view if the claim is a genuine one - Since there is claim of settlement on behalf of the buyer, which was not controverted by the insured before any forum, it cannot be said that the claim of insurance is a genuine one - On the ground of delay also, the State Commission’s findings cannot be upheld.
India Law Library Docid # 2400954

(642) ORIENT BELL LIMITED Vs. KANTA GOYAL, WIFE OF SH.SURINDER KUMAR AND OTHERS[PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 23-11-2023
In nutshell, the complainant purchased 55 boxes of Orient Tiles for the area of 1200 sq. ft. for use the same in her house from opposite party No.1 and paid an amount of Rs.90,948.00, vide against invoice No.41 dated 25.06.2017.
India Law Library Docid # 2400997

(643) ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. RAJEEV KANT[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 23-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 21(b) – Revisional Jurisdiction - The revisional jurisdiction of the National Commission under Section 21(b) of the said Act is extremely limited - It should be exercised only in case as contemplated within the parameters specified in the said provision, namely when it appears to the National Commission that the State Commission had exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or had failed to exercise jurisdiction so vested, or had acted in the exerc
India Law Library Docid # 2400943

(644) NEW INDIAASSURANCE CO. AND OTHERS Vs. M/S LAYALPUR TRANSPORT CORPORATION RAINBOW MARKET, POLYTECHNIC CHOWK, AMBALA CITY AND OTHERS[HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 23-11-2023
Consumer Law – Motor Vehicle Insurance – Non holding of genuine license - The complainant, owner of a truck, suffered injuries and its cleaner expired after falling down in a drain due to heavy fog - The insurer surveyed the vehicle and paid Rs.4,75,000 for repairs - The insurer repudiated the claim, claiming it was a breach of contract - The complainant filed a complaint seeking compensation for damages, loss, mental agony, harassment, and crane charges - The insurer argued that refusal to pay
India Law Library Docid # 2400976

(645) M/S MANN AND HUMMEL FILTER PVT. LTD. Vs. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-11-2023
M/s. Mann and Hummel Filters Private Limited (the Insured) has filed above complaint, for directing Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited (the Insurer) to pay (i) Rs.15569940/- with interest @24% per annum from 12.06.2012 till the date of payment, towards insurance claim; and (iii) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstance of the case.
India Law Library Docid # 2400960

(646) SURESH KUMAR Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-11-2023
Complainant alleges that: he is owner of vehicle/Dumper make TATA LPT registration No.HR38-M/7387 (Truck), Engine No.60C62467723, Chassis No.396522DTZ-207895. It was comprehensively insured with OPs vide insurance policy No.261701/31/2017/1320 valid from 07.05.2016 to 06.05.2017. He paid premium.
India Law Library Docid # 2400977

(647) SMART ASSET SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. ANANTH PARIMI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-11-2023
Consumer Law – Housing - The respondent, a non-resident Indian, was involved in a dispute with a company selling properties - The company misled the respondent by granting a 12-month extension for approval, leading to a dispute over the authenticity of the supplementary agreement - The respondent revoked the power of attorney, seeking a refund and compensation for mental harassment
India Law Library Docid # 2400951

(648) YASH Vs. DR. AJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-11-2023
This Revision Petition has been filed by Petitioner/Complainant under Section 21(b) against the impugned Order dated 24.05.2017 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana, Panchkula in F.A. No. 227 of 2016, vide which the Appeal filed by the Complainant was partly allowed and the Order of the District Forum was modified.
India Law Library Docid # 2400952

(649) GURDEEP SINGH Vs. DALJEET KUMAR S/O PRITAM AND OTHERS[PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-11-2023
The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/complainant against the impugned order dated 01.08.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana (in short “District Commission”)
India Law Library Docid # 2400996

(650) SMT. DROPATI DEVI Vs. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE LTD.[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-11-2023
Briefly, the case of the complainant is that complainant is the owner of the vehicle (Mahindra Bolero Pick-up) bearing registration No.HP-32A-2561. The said vehicle was insured with the opposite party/insurance company for a sum of Rs.5,70,855/- and the risk was covered from 17.01.2014 to 16.01.2015.
India Law Library Docid # 2400984

(651) KOTHOTTIL PHARMACEUTICAL DISTRIBUTORS AND OTHERS Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD AND OTHERS[KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-11-2023
This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. This complaint is filed claiming a compensation of Rs.81,00,000/-(Rupees Eighty One Lakhs) from the opposite parties for losses sustained through fire. According to the complainant, though there
India Law Library Docid # 2400989

(652) MR. NEERAJ GAUBA AND ANOTHER Vs. BESTECH INDIA PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint are as that the Complainants booked a unit bearing number A-1102 with the Opposite Parties in the project called "Park View Sanskruti," situated in Sector 91, Gurgaon, Haryana. The Complainants also paid a booking amount of Rs. 10,00,000 towards the said unit, which was duly acknowledged by Opposite Party No. 1.
India Law Library Docid # 2400964

(653) MR. STEPHEN ROGER AFONSO Vs. SHRI. CHANDRAS PEDNEKAR[GOA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
This Judgement and Order arises out of appeal filed by Appellant against Judgment and Order dated 04/08/2017 passed by District Commission North at Porvorim-Goa in CC/20/2011.
India Law Library Docid # 2400969

(654) SHRI KRISHAN COLD STORAGE Vs. DEEP SINGH[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
Consumer Law - Deficiency in service - Revisional Jurisdiction - The respondent stored 1087 bags of potatoes in the petitioner's cold storage in May 2015, charging Rs.20,000 as part payment - In November 2015, the potatoes were spoiled, and the complainant filed a complaint, claiming negligence - The District Forum partially allowed the complaint and directed payment of Rs 2,64,600, compensation, and litigation expenses - The State Commission affirmed the District Forum's order, holding the pet
India Law Library Docid # 2400958

(655) MANAGER, HDFC EGRO GENRAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. BHARAT LAL MOGRE[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
Consumer Law – Medical – ‘Critical Illness Policy’ – ‘D’, the late son of the respondent, purchased a Critical Illness Policy for Rs 5,00,000/- on 30.05.2014 - He was admitted to various hospitals and underwent brain surgery - On 20.04.2015, he died during treatment - The claim was repudiated due to the insured's inability to survive for at least 30/15 days and expiration of intracranial hemorrhage and hypertension, which are not covered under "critical illness.
India Law Library Docid # 2400959

(656) M/S INTERNATIONAL TRACTORS LTD. Vs. VIJAY KUMAR S/O SH. BANKU RAM AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
Brief facts of the case are that the complainant had purchased Sonalika tractor in sum of Rs.6,15,000/- from opposite party No.2/dealer on 29-10-2012 which was financed by K.C.C. Bank, Kangoo.
India Law Library Docid # 2400980

(657) PAWAN KUMAR Vs. THE SENIOR MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. MEHATPUR[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
Briefly, the case of the complainant is that the complainant is registered owner of multi Axle trailer HGV Tralla No. HR-55C-1161 and it was insured with opposite party/insurance company w.e.f. 02-08-2014 to 01-08-2015. On 13-9-2014
India Law Library Docid # 2400981

(658) NARESH VERMA Vs. SINGH BROTHERS (SHOE PALACE)[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
Briefly, case of the complainant is that the complainant purchased a one pair of shoes from the opposite party on 22.04.2019, for a sun of Rs.3,400/-. It is stated that the complainant paid the entire amount to the opposite party in cash
India Law Library Docid # 2400982

(659) UBER INDIA SYSTEMS PVT. LTD. Vs. REEMA JEETSINGH CHAWLA[MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
The Petitioner – Uber India Systems Pvt. Ltd., has preferred the present Revision Petition feeling aggrieved by the order dated 18/11/2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Central Mumbai,
India Law Library Docid # 2400992

(660) DUA HOSPITAL & MATERNITY HOME, AZAD CHOWK AND OTHERS Vs. JATINDER KAUR W/O MANDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
Appellants/opposite parties No. 1 & 2 i.e. Dua Hospital and Maternity Home (hereinafter referred as OPs No.1&2), have filed the present appeal through its Incharge Dr. Chetan Dua to challenge the impugned order dated 22.01.2021 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar (in short, “the District Commission”)
India Law Library Docid # 2400993