ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(701) INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. MOHAN KATARA SON OF SH. SHAM LAL AND OTHERS[PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
It would be apposite to mention here that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission.
India Law Library Docid # 2400994

(702) CHARANJIT SINGH S/O SR. SURJIT SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. C & C TOWERS LTD., AND OTHERS[PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
This order of ours shall dispose off two Complaints i.e. Consumer Complaint No.182 of 2019 and Consumer Complaint No.184 of 2019 filed by the complainants under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the Act”)
India Law Library Docid # 2400995

(703) SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. SMT. RACHNA KUMARI W/O LATE SH. KULDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
The opposite parties No.1&2/Insurance company resisted and contested the complaint by filing joint reply. The opposite parties/insurance company stated that after receiving information regarding accident, opposite parties/insurance company immediately deputed independent surveyor. The loss to the tune of Rs.3,97,340/-
India Law Library Docid # 2400983

(704) MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS Vs. VYSYAN HAMZA PROPRIETOR SAHIRA FURNITURE AND INDUSTRIES MAIN ROAD KAMBALAKKAD POST KANIYAMBETTA[KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023
The opposite parties 1 and 2 in C.C.No.139/2013 of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Wayanad, Kalpetta (the District Forum for short) challenge in this appeal an order dated 18.05.2015, partly allowing the complaint. The complainant is the 1st respondent and the 3rd opposite party in the complaint is the 2nd respondent herein. As per the order appealed against, the District Forum has disallowed the claim of the appellants
India Law Library Docid # 2400990

(705) THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. M/S ORIENT RESINS LTD.[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-11-2023
Consumer Law – Vehicle Theft – Repudiation of claim - The Appellant/Opposite Party appeals a District Commission judgment, arguing that the commission erred in ignoring insurance policy terms and awarded a claim for a lower sum than insured, resulting in a repudiation - However, it is clear from the insurance policy that the IDV value of the vehicle in question was Rs. 2,00,000/-.
India Law Library Docid # 2400963

(706) AJIT SINGH Vs. M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-11-2023
Consumer Law – Motor Vehicle Insurance Policy - Leaving ignition key in the vehicle by the driver for a short period, during which, the vehicle was stolen is not a breach of the condition of the policy – Appeal Allowed.
India Law Library Docid # 2400956

(707) PRADEEP & COMPANY Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-11-2023
Consumer Law – Railway – Damage in transit – Revisional Jurisdiction - During delivery, the complainant detected a shortage of 152 bags of cement, 2705 bags were water damaged - The complainant submitted a claim of Rs.3,58,807-, but the OP did not take action - The complaint filed a CC before the District Forum, which was allowed by the District Forum – State Commission has given a well-reasoned order and the revisional jurisdiction of the National Commission under Section 21(b) of the said Act
India Law Library Docid # 2400957

(708) NEW INDIAASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. AMIT EARTH MOVERS[HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-11-2023
Complainant alleged that: on 19.11.2009 he purchased Hydraulic Excavator PC 200 M/C 5.7M for basic value of Rs.40,50,000/- and total value (including taxes) was Rs.44,71,394/-. He got insured aforesaid machine with OP/appellant and renewing insurance policy of machine for past four years, continuously from 2012-13 till 2015-16.
India Law Library Docid # 2400978

(709) REKHA KUMARI W/O SH. VEERU ALIAS RAUJENDER Vs. SH.TULSI RAM BANSAL, S/O SH. JINDU RAM AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-11-2023
Instant appeal is arising out of the order dated 24.04.2018 passed by learned District Consumer Commission, Una camp at Bilaspur in Consumer Complaint No.128/2015, titled as Rekha Kumari Versus Tulsi Ram & Another.
India Law Library Docid # 2400979

(710) RAGHUVEER SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. NARAYANA HRIDAYALAYA LTD. (NARAYANA MULTISPECIALTY HOSPITAL) AND 2 OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-11-2023
This Order shall decide both the appeals arising out from the impugned Judgment /Order dated 30.07.2019 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”) in Complaint No. 157/2017, wherein the State Commission partly allowed the complaint.
India Law Library Docid # 2400780

(711) M/S. SHAKAMBARI POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & 3 OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-11-2023
The complaint arises out of an insurance claim relating to the damage stated to have caused to the goods that was sustained due to a fall during transit. The claim has been repudiated by the insurance company. Hence this complaint.
India Law Library Docid # 2400777

(712) MAYA SHARMA AND 2 OTHERS Vs. RAJ HOSPITAL AND 3 OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-11-2023
The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner(s) against Respondent(s) as detailed above, under section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 22.05.2018 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jharkhand, Ranchi, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’), in First Appeal (FA) No. 82/2017 in which order dated 28.11.2016
India Law Library Docid # 2400778

(713) NEW INDIAASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. M/S. N.R.H. CO.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-11-2023
The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner against Respondent as detailed above, under section 58 (1) (b) of Consumer Protection Act 2019, against the order dated 23.03.2021 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gujarat (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’), in First Appeal (FA) No.1389 of 2013
India Law Library Docid # 2400779

(714) KHANNA PAPER MILLS LTD. Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-11-2023
This complaint is by a Paper Mill about an insurance claim that has been repudiated by the opposite party, United India Insurance Company Limited on 01.12.2010. The present complaint was filed praying for damages suffered by the complainant due to breakdown of an Industrial Steam Turbine installed by the complainant for power generation.
India Law Library Docid # 2400776

(715) M/S EMPIRE HOME APPLIANCES LTD. Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-11-2023
This is an insurance claim which was filed in respect of a claim under a Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy the duration whereof was from 15.04.2011 to 14.04.2012. On 15.07.2011 a fire is alleged to have taken place in which the goods stored within the premises as mentioned in the policy are said to have been gutted and destroyed.
India Law Library Docid # 2400775

(716) M/S. CLINIC NALLAM AND ANOTHER Vs. A. HELEN VICTORIA AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-11-2023
The Appellant filed the instant Appeal under section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short the Act), against the Order dated 20.04.2012 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Puducherry (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) in Consumer Complaint No. 2 of 2004, wherein the State Commission partly allowed the Complaint filed by the Complainant.. For the sake of Convenience, the parties in the present matter being referred to as position held in Consumer
India Law Library Docid # 1882350

(717) MR. KRISHAN CHANDER MALIK Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH ITS REGIONAL MANGER AND OTHERS[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-11-2023
Complainant joined the service of the OP in the year of 1983 and retired from there on 31st March 2001 under the voluntary retirement scheme opened by the Bank. At the time of his retirement interalia he also received a sum of Rs. 56,042/- towards leave encashment of the total service rendered by him to the Bank. He deposited the said amount in his
India Law Library Docid # 2400578

(718) SAHARA HOSPITALITY LTD. Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-11-2023
This complaint was heard on 16.10.2023 and again on 26.10.2023 when inal arguments proceeded and the judgment was reserved on 3.11.2023 when the Ld. Counsel for the parties finally concluded their arguments supported by their Written Submissions and the Judgments relied upon by them. However, in order to reduce the narration of facts in this judgment, the
India Law Library Docid # 2400573

(719) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. STERLITE POWER TRANSMISSION LIMITED[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-11-2023
The Appellant has preferred the present Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to set aside the impugned order dated 02.06.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-X, Udyog Sadan, C- 22 & 23 Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi in Complaint Case no. 190/2020 filed by Respondent/Complainant against the Appellant/Opposite Party. Vide impugned order dated 02.06.2023, the District Commission while deciding
India Law Library Docid # 2400577

(720) J. NAGI REDDY MANAGING PARTNER, SRI MEENAKSHI BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS Vs. RAVI SHANKAR AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-11-2023
The present First Appeal, filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, is brought forth by J Nagi Reddy, (henceforth referred to as the "Appellant" or "Opposite Party No.3"). This Appeal challenges the Order dated 08.12.2011 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore, Karnataka, (henceforth termed as "the State Commission"), in Consumer Complaint No. 145 of 2009, wherein the complaint filed by the Complainants (Respondents No. 1 & 2 herein) was allowed
India Law Library Docid # 2400572