ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(761) VINEET RUIA AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. GEETA GANESH PROMOTERS PVT. LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 23-08-2023
Vineet Ruia and Smt. Anuradha Ruia have filed above complaint for directing the opposite party to (i) complete registration formality of the property in question, immediately, without any additional cost to be borne by the complainants; (ii) restrain the opposite party from selling Flat No. 11-B, Tower 5, 93, Moulana Abul Kalam Azam Sarani, Kolkata or creating third party interest over it; (iii) pay compensation for delayed possession, in the form of interest on their deposit and further interes
India Law Library Docid # 1882119

(762) CLOUDTAIL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. CENTRAL CONSUMER PROTECTION AUTHORITY [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 23-08-2023
Above appeal has been filed from the order of Central Consumer Protection Authority dated 14.11.2022, passed in Case No.J-25/72/2021, directing the appellant to recall 1033 pressure cookers, sold by the appellant in the country, refunding its price to the consumers, within 45 days and imposed a penalty of Rs.100000/-, for selling the pressure cooker, in violation of Quality Control Order, 2020. Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India, in exercise of its power under Section 17 read
India Law Library Docid # 1882305

(763) BRANCH MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. BANWARI LAL GUPTA [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 23-08-2023
The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner(s) against Respondent as detailed above, under section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 02.08.2019 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan, Jaipur, (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in First Appeal (FA) No. 61 of 2019 in which order dated 07.01.2019 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as Distri
India Law Library Docid # 1882309

(764) DR. AJAY SINGH PUNDEER AND ANOTHER Vs. SHAMSHER SINGH AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-08-2023
The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioners against Respondents as detailed above, under section 21 (b) of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 20.12.2017 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in First Appeal (FA) No. 328 of 2009 in which order dated 30.03.2009 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Shekh Sarai, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Consumer Co
India Law Library Docid # 1882248

(765) M/S. AMBIKA LAND DEVELOPERS Vs. SHRI RAJPAL LAXMAN RAUT [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-08-2023
Above appeal has been filed from the order of Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench Nagpur, dated 22.07.2022, passed in Consumer Complaint No.4 of 2018, partly allowing the complaint with cost of Rs.50000/- and directing the appellant to handover possession of Plot Nos. 11-B and 30-B, as per pre-revised layout plan or Plot Nos. 32 and 30 as per revised layout plan, located at Namdeo Nagar, Mouza Lava, i.g.u. 4, Khasra No.40, tehsil Nagpur Gramin, district Nagpur
India Law Library Docid # 1882256

(766) ESAF SMALL FINANCE BANK LTD TOWN BRANCH DPO ROAD PALAKKAD KERALA Vs. UBAID AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-08-2023
Above revision has been filed against the order of Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthpuram, dated 18.04.2023, dismissing First Appeal No.171 of 2023 (arising from the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Palakkad, dated 30.01.2023 passed in CC/8/2020), where by District Commission allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to restructure the schedule of repayment of the loan of the complainant, calculating interest at the rate based on g
India Law Library Docid # 1882261

(767) ROHAN KAKKAR AND OTHERS Vs. IREO GRACE REALTECH PRIVATE LIMITED [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-08-2023
Rohan Kakkar, Vinod Kakkar, Ashish Kumar Goel and Girija Chandrawat have filed above complaint for directing the opposite party to (i) refund entire amount deposited by them with interest @18% per annum, from the date of respective deposit till the date of refund; (ii) pay Rs.500000/-, as compensation for mental agony and harassment; (iii) pay Rs.100000/-, as litigation costs; and (iii) any other relief, which is deemed fit and proper in the fact of the case. The complainants stated that Ireo Gr
India Law Library Docid # 1882282

(768) CHAIRMAN, BELGAUM POSTAL & RMS DN. CO-OP CR. SCT LTD AND ANOTHER Vs. SHIVANAND SHIVABASAPPA KADAKOL AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-08-2023
Above revision petitions have been filed against the orders of Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru, dated 29.09.2022, dismissing Review Application No.13 of 2022, RA/14/2022, RA/15/2022, RA/16/2022 & RA/17/2022 and dated 08.12.2021 dismissing FA/1576/2017, FA/1577/2017, FA/1578/2017, FA/1579/2017 & FA/1580/2017 (arising from the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Belagavi, dated 26.04.2017 passed in Consumer Complaint Nos.222, 223 and 224/2016 and
India Law Library Docid # 1882302

(769) M/S. SHRIRAM CHITS (MAHARASHTRA) LTD. Vs. SHEFALI [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-08-2023
Aggrieved by the concurrent findings and Orders passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chandrapur, Maharashtra (for short, the District Forum) and State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Nagpur Circuit Bench (for short, the State Commission), the Opposite Party M/s Shriram Chits (Maharashtra) Ltd. has filed the present Revision Petition under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, the Act). The Complaint filed by the Complainant / Res
India Law Library Docid # 1882284

(770) JASIBEN GOVINDBHAI MAKWANA Vs. AVIVA LIFE INSURANCE CO. INDIA LTD. [GUJARAT STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-08-2023
The above named complainant has filed this complaint under clauses (c), (d),(g) and (r) of Sub Section (1) of Section 2 read with Section 12 and 14 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein after referred as The Act or Act) and prayed for the relief as under: (a). Be pleased to direct the opponent to pay Rs.25,00,000/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of repudiation i.e.30/1/2016 (b). Be pleased to direct the opponent to pay compensation in the sum of Rs.50,000/- for mental pain and har
India Law Library Docid # 1882301

(771) MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA FARM DIVISION Vs. SUMIT KUMAR AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-08-2023
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 30.11.2017 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Haryana (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in First Appeal (FA) No. 752 of 2016 in which order dated 13.06.2016 of Sonepat District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as District Forum ) in Consumer Complaint (C
India Law Library Docid # 1882329

(772) BAJAJ ALLIANZ LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. MACHERLA KISHORE KUMAR [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-08-2023
These are two Revision Petitions filed by the Insurance Company which was the Opposite Party in Consumer Complaint Nos.73 & 74 of 2013. The Complainants therein were the wife and brother of deceased Macherla Kishore Kumar who had taken two separate Insurance Policies on his life for Rs.2 lakhs and Rs.5 lakhs in favour of his wife and brother respectively. One of the complaints was initially allowed by the District Forum, but the other one was dismissed in view of the contest raised on behalf of
India Law Library Docid # 1882280

(773) SATISH ESTATES PVT. LTD. Vs. GULSHAN RAI [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-08-2023
This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/Opposite Party No.1 against Respondents/ Complainant and Opposite Party No.2 challenging the impugned Order dated 20.04.2018 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, Punjab, in Consumer Complaint bearing No. 540 of 2017. Vide such Order, the State Commission had directed the Opposite Party to deliver possession, and in the alternative, an order for refund was passed. The brief facts of the case are that the Complainant ha
India Law Library Docid # 1882283

(774) STATE BANK OF BIKANER AND JAIPUR Vs. VIPIN KUMAR AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-08-2023
The present Revision Petition ( RP) has been filed by the Petitioners against the Respondents, as detailed above, under section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 12.12.2012 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Punjab ( hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) in First Appeal ( FA) No. 27 of 2009 in which order dated 06.11.2008 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Sangrur (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Consumer Complain
India Law Library Docid # 1882285

(775) CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD Vs. KARNIAL SINGH [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-08-2023
This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/Opposite Party against the Respondent/Complainant challenging the impugned Order dated 07.04.2016 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.T., Chandigarh, in Consumer Complaint bearing No. 208 of 2015. Vide such Order, the State Commission had partly allowed the Complaint. The brief facts of the case are that the Complainant had applied for allotment of a Flat comprising of 3 bedrooms vide Application Form No. 14103 under General S
India Law Library Docid # 1882303

(776) M/S. BPTP LTD. Vs. AROOP KUMAR SINGH AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-08-2023
This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/Opposite Party against Respondents/Legal Heirs of the original Complainant, challenging the impugned Order dated 05.05.2017 passed by the Ld. State Commission, Delhi, in Complaint Case bearing No. 406 of 2011. Vide such Order, the State Commission had allowed the Complaint. The brief facts of the case are that relying upon the assurance of the Opposite Party that the possession would be handed over by March, 2011, the Complainant had booked a Flat in a
India Law Library Docid # 1882308

(777) MR. ANAND KUMAR Vs. TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. [DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-08-2023
The present complaint has been filed by the Complainants before this commission alleging deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Party and has prayed the following reliefs: a) To hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of unit no. 902 on the Ninth Floor of tower 10 b) To withdraw the letter dated 11.09.2018 more particularly to drop the demand of Rs.7,96,263.70 c) To pay a sum of Rs. 5,00,000 as damages/compensation for keeping the complainants in dark about alteration in area, demand
India Law Library Docid # 1882123

(778) SURESH CHANDRA GUPTA Vs. HDFC BANK LTD. AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-08-2023
Above revision has been filed against the order of Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, dated 01.03.2023, passed in First Appeal No.170 of 2014 (arising from the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, New Delhi, dated 12.12.2013 passed in CC/635/2009), whereby District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the respondents to pay Rs.50000/- to the complainant and State Commission enhanced to Rs.300000/-. Suresh Chandra Gupta (the petitioner) filed CC/635/2009 for d
India Law Library Docid # 1882272

(779) ASHOK AUTO SALES LIMITED AGRA KANPUR ROAD NOONIHAI AGRA UTTAR PRADESH Vs. SUBHASHIS JAIN AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-08-2023
Above revision has been filed against the order of Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow, dated 07.09.2022, passed in First Appeal No.847 of 2016 & First Appeal No.1813 of 2016 (arising from the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Agra, dated 26.03.2016 passed in CC/85/2012), whereby District Forum allowed the complaint with cost of Rs.10000/- and directed the petitioner and respondent-2 to pay Rs.648200/- with interest @8% per annum, from the date
India Law Library Docid # 1882278

(780) SUBHASH KUMAR Vs. VIPIN KUMAR AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-08-2023
This complaint under section 58(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short, the Act) has been filed against the opposite party alleging harassment and deficiency in service in cancellation of one residential unit and returning part of the payment made and not refunding the payment received in respect of other apartments booked by him in five different projects of the opposite party. This order will also dispose of Consumer Complaint No. 140 of 2022 which pertains to the same respondent an
India Law Library Docid # 1882286