(681) A. ILYAS AHMED Vs. THE EXPORT CREDIT GUARANTEE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-01-2024 Insurance Law Export Credit Guarantee Policy Claim for losses due to non-payment by foreign buyer Interpretation of "consignment basis" versus "firm purchase basis" Assessment of delay in filing reports and its impact on claim admissibility. India Law Library Docid # 2401689
(682) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. BELABEN HARISH KUMAR GANDHI AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-01-2024 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 3; Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 21(b) — Driving Without Valid License — Insurance Claim — Breach of Policy Conditions — Held, for an insurer to avoid liability on the ground of the driver lacking a valid license, the insurer must prove that the insured was guilty of negligence and failed to exercise reasonable care in ensuring the vehicle was driven by a duly licensed driver. Mere absence or invalidity of the license is not sufficient. The burden of pr India Law Library Docid # 2401690
(683) JAHIR KHAN Vs. ASHOK LEYLAND AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Delay in filing — Condonation granted for delay in filing the Revision Petition based on stated reasons. India Law Library Docid # 2401691
(684) SATBIR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. RAHEJA DEVELOPERS LIMITED AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Maintainability of Complaint Plot of land for housing construction Buy-back facility Consumer Fora have jurisdiction to deal with complaints of deficiency of service in relation to immovable properties. India Law Library Docid # 2401686
(685) SANDEEP NATHURAM NALAVADE Vs. SHIVASAHYADRI EMU FARM AND HATCHRIES AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-01-2024 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — Sufficient Cause — Court should lean favorably towards defaulting petitioners and not adopt a pedantic approach, but should decide cases on merits rather than thwarting the cause on the ground of limitation — However, the law of limitation must be respected and complied with, and judicial discretion for condonation of delay must be exercised judiciously based on sufficient cause and factual basis provided by the petitioner. India Law Library Docid # 2401687
(686) PREM KUMAR CHAUDHARY Vs. M/S. BESTECH INDIA PVT. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Sections 2(1)(g), 12, 21, 22—Deficiency in service—Failure to offer possession of flat within stipulated time—Complainant sought refund of amount paid—Developer acknowledged booking and issued allotment letter—Agreement stipulated possession within 36 months + 6 months grace period—Complainant paid part of the sale consideration—Delay in project completion due to a gas pipeline issue requiring revised plans and permissions—Occupancy Certificate obtained late—Complai India Law Library Docid # 2401684
(687) DR. H.B. M. PANTH Vs. ASKARI HUSSAIN AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Deficiency in Service Medical Negligence Prima facie case of negligence established by complainants through pre-operative treatments and outcome of surgery. Onus shifts to medical establishment to prove no negligence. Circumstances suggest operational decisions were made in haste, ignoring ultrasound reports, leading to patient's condition. India Law Library Docid # 2401685
(688) DR. H.B. M. PANTH Vs. ASKARI HUSSAIN AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 2(1)(d), 12 — Medical Negligence — Deficiency in Service — Elements of medical negligence (4 Ds) — Duty, Dereliction, Direct Causation, Damages — Burden of proof — Doctor-patient relationship — Failure to prove doctor-patient relationship and duty of care — Lack of essential medical records (anaesthesia record, OT register, delivery register, nursing notes) — Unsubstantiated allegations — Hearsay evidence — Presumption and conjecture against doctors — Med India Law Library Docid # 2401609
(689) VIRENDRA AGRAWAL AND OTHERS Vs. NEEPA REAL ESTATES PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-01-2024 RERA, Property Law Flat booking agreement Super built-up area vs. Carpet area Burden of proof Developer failed to provide initial allotment letter Ledger account showed super built-up area Demand for increased carpet area unjustified and quashed Refund of amount paid under protest with interest. India Law Library Docid # 2401608
(690) BHAJAN BHAGWANT SINGH Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Insurance Policy — Claim Denial — Scope of interference with lower Fora's findings. India Law Library Docid # 2401607
(691) A.C. DHARMADEVI Vs. INDIAN BANK AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d)(ii) — Consumer — Commercial Purpose — Exclusion of — Amendment — Loan for running a business — Held not for earning livelihood by self-employment — Hence, excluded from definition of consumer. India Law Library Docid # 2401610
(692) M/S. PREMIUM ACRES INFRATECH PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. RAVINDER SINGH AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 19 Appeal against State Commission order directing possession and compensation Where buyer paid full amount but was denied possession due to alleged outstanding dues claimed by builder, and re-possessed by builder despite buyer performing house warming ceremony and offering to pay remaining dues as per State Commission's order, this constitutes deficiency in service. India Law Library Docid # 2401611
(693) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. KEHAR SINGH[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Insurance Company challenging order allowing consumer claim — Factual background involves vehicle theft, delayed police FIR, repudiation of claim by insurer due to delayed intimation and classification as criminal breach of trust, and subsequent court-directed FIR leading to untraced report — District Forum and State Commission partly allowed the claim. India Law Library Docid # 2401605
(694) MUKESH G. DHAKAN Vs. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-01-2024 Insurance Law — Jeweller's Block Insurance Policy — Claim repudiation — Fire incident causing alleged loss of gold — Complainant failed to establish actual loss — Insurance Company repudiated claim based on surveyor's report citing lack of documentary evidence for stock, inconsistent statements, and improbable theories of gold melting and washing away — State Commission dismissed complaint, holding that complex facts required civil court intervention — Appeal dismissed as complainant could not s India Law Library Docid # 2401615
(695) RAM TIRATH GUPTA Vs. M/S. V.N. SHARMA BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeals — Cross appeals filed against State Commission's order partially allowing consumer complaint — One appeal for enhancement of compensation, other to set aside the order. India Law Library Docid # 2401616
(696) M/S TATA METALIKS LIMITED, TATA CENTRE Vs. CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-01-2024 Marine Insurance Open Cover Policy Repudiation of Claim The complainant sought marine transit insurance for cargo from Australia to India. The policy covered transit from any port in the world to specified plant sites in India via vessel, road, or rail. A specific consignment of coal was discharged at Paradip Port, India. Subsequently, a cyclone caused damage to the coal while it was stored on a plot of land near the jetty. The insurance company repudiated the claim, arguing that the coverage India Law Library Docid # 2401617
(697) AMIT GUPTA AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. BPTP LIMITED AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — Onus of proof — The burden to prove that a complainant is engaged in the business of real estate and buying and selling property lies on the opposite party (developer), and this burden must be discharged with evidence. India Law Library Docid # 2401618
(698) VIVEK DODA AND ANOTHER Vs. ESTATE OFFICER, GMADA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(d) and Section 12(a) — Complaint filed against statutory development authority for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice regarding plot purchased in public auction — Complaint dismissed — A person purchasing a plot in a public auction, especially on an 'as is where is basis', is not considered a 'consumer' under the Act, and the development authority is not a 'service provider' in such a scenario — Consequently, consumer forums lack jurisdict India Law Library Docid # 2401619
(699) BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. M.M. KNITWEARS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against State Commission's order — Delay in filing appeal — Condonation of delay — Appeal filed with delay of 46 days — Delay condoned in the interest of justice considering reasons provided in application. India Law Library Docid # 2401620
(700) RAHUL RANKA Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-01-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Assailing order of State Commission setting aside District Forum order upholding complaint — Insurance claim — Vehicle theft — FIR lodged after delay — Violation of policy conditions. India Law Library Docid # 2401612