ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(741) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO Vs. VIKAS JAIN AND OTHER[HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-11-2023
Delay of 50 days in filing of present appeal stands condoned for the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay. 2. Challenge in this Appeal No. 607 of 2017 is invited by United India Insurance Company Ltd./insurer to the legality of order dated 20.02.2017 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-Palwal (In short “District Consumer Commission”) in Complaint Case No.112 of 2016, vide which, complainant’s complaint has been allowed.
India Law Library Docid # 2400462

(742) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. M.M. CONSTRUCTION (ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION)[UTTARAKHAND STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Section 41 – ‘Contractor’s All Risks Insurance Policy’ - The aforesaid insurance is for compensation in case of any loss suffered by the company / complainant during road construction of 10 Kilometers - Heavy rain caused road construction work damage - The opposite party hired a surveyor to assess the damage, but the insurance company denied the claim due to delayed notification of accident - The opposite party claims the complaint was filed with false information
India Law Library Docid # 2400465

(743) MANAS KUMAR MAITY Vs. KALIPADA DAS & 3 OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act 1986 - Section 21(a) - Compensation - Fail to deliver possession of flat and register deed of conveyance - It is clear from the above deed of revocation that nothing contained in this deed has rendered invalid or ineffective any act, deed or thing lawfully and bonafidly done or caused to be done by the said attorney (respondent 4 herein) under and by virtue of the power given to him before the revocation thereof by Respondents 1 and 2 herein - Further, it is to be noted t
India Law Library Docid # 2400400

(744) RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. HARYANA Vs. MAN SINGH AND ANOTHER[HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-11-2023
Insurance Claim - Car met with accident due to sudden appearance of a wild cow - While saving wild cow; vehicle turned turtle in roadside ditch and caught fire - Fire Brigade came there, but car burnt badly - Burning of vehicle in fire was self created by complainant, palpably, to thwart the entire process of recovery of loan - Complainant carrying such like mischievous and mala fide intention, cannot be allowed to succeed - Mischievous and ill motivated conduct of complainant; this Commission,
India Law Library Docid # 2400401

(745) JAYPEE GREENS Vs. YOGESH KUMAR GARG [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-11-2023
Heard Mr. Sumeet Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant and Mr. Saurabh Gupta, Advocate, for the respondent. Jaypee Greens (the opposite party) has filed above appeal against order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi, dated 24.10.2016, passed in CC/582/2016, allowing the complaint with cost of Rs.100000/- and directing the appellant to refund Rs.6807595/- with interest @18% per annum from date of respective deposit till the date of payment, within sixty days, with default clause
India Law Library Docid # 1882324

(746) COL RETD. VIJANDER BHANDARI Vs. REGIONAL DIRECTOR,EX-SRVICEMAN CONTRIBUTORY HEALTH [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-11-2023
The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner against Respondent as detailed above, under section 21 (b) of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 20.07.2022 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Maharashtra (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in First Appeal (FA) No. A/19/235 in which order dated 11.09.018 of South Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as District Forum ) in Consumer Complaint
India Law Library Docid # 1882351

(747) M/S. MOHAN INDUSTRIES Vs. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-11-2023
The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner against Respondents as detailed above, under section 21 (b) of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 29.07.2013 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in First Appeal (FA) No.A/04/1901 in which order dated 08.09.2004 of Bhandara District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Petition No. 68/2003
India Law Library Docid # 1882357

(748) INDIAN RAILWAY Vs. MR. S. VIJAYARAGHVAN[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-11-2023
Limitation of Act, 1963 – Section 5 - Condonation of delay - The current case proceedings were conducted under the Old Act - Before discussing the merits of the present application filed on 04.10.2023 along with the appeal, it is crucial to determine whether it is maintainable under the New Act or the Old Act - Relying on the settled law and considering the fact that there was no proper explanation offered by the appellant for the delay except inculpating the government lengthy approval procedur
India Law Library Docid # 2400460

(749) M/S TRACKON COURIER PVT. LTD. AND OTHER Vs. AKSHAY KUMAR[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-11-2023
Consumer Law – Courier Service – Complainant sent keys, RC and NOC of car - Courier sent at wrong place - The complainant was compelled to get the RC and the NOC prepared again and to replace the lock of the car - The complainant is seeking compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-. - After hearing the complainant, learned District Commission allowed the complaint- The appellants' counsel argues that the opposite parties/courier agency didn't have the proper opportunity to defend themselves before the Distr
India Law Library Docid # 2400464

(750) SUBHASH CHAND Vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-11-2023
Consumer Law – Interest – Motor Accident - Complainant is registered owner of vehicle (Truck) and the same was insured with the opposite party from 01.06.2015 to 30.12.2015 - The vehicle was damaged in an accident on 30.12.2015, causing a loss of Rs.11,15,897 - The insurance company assessed the loss, and the claim amount was agreed upon to be Rs.9,20,000, including salvage, as a full and final settlement - Although the IDV of the vehicle in question was Rs.14,00,000/-, but the complainant was c
India Law Library Docid # 2400463

(751) M/S. VARIETY POLYSTERS LIMITED Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & 2 OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-10-2023
Consumer Complaint - Breach of contract terms - Violation of terms of the policy - Insurance Claim - Construction of 2022 toilets across the State of Madhya Pradesh that were to be constructed in Primary and Middle Schools - It is evident that whatever contract the complainant alleges to have entered into with the respondent number 3, was clearly snapped with the Memorandum of Understanding dated 10.06.2015 - Any continuance of work or storing of material after 10.06.2015 was not authorized unde
India Law Library Docid # 2400398

(752) GREEN LAND FRUITS & VEGETABLES (P) LTD. Vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-10-2023
Insurance Claim - Loss or damage - A Cold Storage, and where the facts are that damage was caused a consignment of Green Peas kept inside that suffered severe damage and was destroyed on 29.04.2017 when the roof of chamber of the plant collapsed affecting more than 16 thousand boxes of peas of 35 kg each - Complainant submits that the duration of the insurance policy was between 08.03.2017 to 07.03.2018 and the risk of all sorts of such contingencies, including a storm, was covered - There was n
India Law Library Docid # 2400399

(753) LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. ILLA RAJAIAH AND OTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 26-10-2023
Insurance Claim - Failure of the insured to disclose the policy of insurance obtained earlier in the proposal form entitled the insurer to repudiate the claim under the policy.
India Law Library Docid # 2400342

(754) VINOD BHUTANI Vs. SHUCHI CHAUDHRY[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 19 - Deficiency in service - Delay in construction of house - Poor service - Modification of enhanced compensation - It is an admitted position that the Complainant and OP have entered into a contract in March 2001 for building of a house on a plot of the Complainant at an estimated cost of Rs. 65 lakhs within 18 months. The Agreement outlined the terms and conditions - While the actual work commenced in April 2002 it was not completed in time stipulated.
India Law Library Docid # 2400343

(755) BAJAJ ALLIANZ LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. GEETA DEVI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-10-2023
Insurance Claim - Deceased Life Assured - Repudiation of claim and deficiency in service - Due to such unethical practices by the wealthy Insurance Companies who can easily afford these 'luxury litigations', the poor surviving dependents, who are in dire need of that money are deprived of the proceeds of the claim when it mattered them the most - Death in this case occurred in 2010 - Had this money been provided to the needy family, instead of repudiating on mischievous grounds and then making
India Law Library Docid # 2400344

(756) RAGHUVEER SINGH Vs. TREHAN HOME DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-10-2023
Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 - Condonation of delay - A delay of 1668 days in filing of Appeal - To condone such delay in filing, the Appellant has to satisfy this Commission that there was sufficient cause for preferring the Appeal after the stipulated period - 'sufficient cause' means that the party should not have acted in a negligent manner or there was a want of bona fide on its part and that the applicant must satisfy that he was prevented by any “sufficient cause” from prosecuting its
India Law Library Docid # 2400345

(757) MRS. DUNDOO ARUNA KUMARI Vs. Y. NAGA SATISH AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 24A - Complaint for deficiency in service - When the physical possession of the property was already delivered and the Complainant and the Respondents are enjoying the possession of the property physically for over 12 years, they cannot suddenly have grievance now, turn around and file a complaint demanding the said documents and attempt to bring the bring the case within the limitation of filing of the Complaint for deficiency in service which under Secti
India Law Library Docid # 2400346

(758) M/S. AZIZ WALL PAPER Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-10-2023
Insurance Claim - Carpets stock damage - Due to heavy showers of rain - Inasmuch as after the surveyor’s visit on 20.08.2007, the complainant/appellant had responded vide his letter dated 11.10.2007 categorically stating reasons for the gap in providing the opportunity as the stocks were being arranged which took time on account of the carpets being heavily soaked in water which had to be dried - It was further stated therein that all the documents which were required were being submitted - Surv
India Law Library Docid # 2400347

(759) 3BEN'S CONSTRUCTIONS AND OTHERS Vs. BENCY RAGHAVAN[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-10-2023
Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 - Consumer Complainant - Condonation of delay - Reason stated for not filing the First Appeal before the NCDRC was because of the floods in the year 2018 and due to Covid-19 pandemic are not plausible and justifiable reasons for condoning the delay - Counsel for the Appellants painstakingly asserted the issues raised in the Application seeking condonation of delay and argued at length to explain the reasons and justify the delay in filing the Appeal - Notwithsta
India Law Library Docid # 2400348

(760) GO DIGIT GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SAURAV SONI S/O HAPPY KUMAR[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-10-2023
Consumer Law - Insurance Claim - Vehicle Accident - Quantum of compensation - Re-assessment report - Appellant/Insurance company has assessed the loss of the complainant at Rs.26,806/- whereas the complainant has claimed a sum of Rs.1,59,756 - Appellant/Insurance company has relied upon the Re-assessment cum Survey report by Surveyor cum Loss Assessor to the complainant in support of its case - But, neither Reassessment Report have been proved on record in accordance with law by the opposite pa
India Law Library Docid # 2400330