ive
User not Logged..
India's Biggest Headnotes Library over 53.69 Lakhs Headnotes
    Free Artificial Intelligence Drafting  

    Free Artificial Intelligence Case Analyzer  

   AI Submission Generator   

Latest Cases

(801) MR. KRISHAN CHANDER MALIK Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH ITS REGIONAL MANGER AND OTHERS[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Leave Encashment — Complainant retired under Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) and received leave encashment — Bank later debited the amount due to alleged discrepancy — Complainant filed a complaint for refund and damages claiming he was a consumer and bank had no right to withdraw the amount — Held, complainant's contention was not tenable in view of an undertaking given by him that if there was any discrepancy after payment, the bank cou
India Law Library Docid # 2400578

(802) SAHARA HOSPITALITY LTD. Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-11-2023
Insurance Law — Interpretation of Policy Terms — Ambiguity — Contra Proferentem Rule — Where an insurance policy contains ambiguous terms, particularly regarding the definition of "storm," the rule of contra proferentem applies, meaning the ambiguity should be interpreted in favor of the insured.
India Law Library Docid # 2400573

(803) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. STERLITE POWER TRANSMISSION LIMITED[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 Section 38(2)(a) Filing of Written Statement The law mandates that a written statement must be filed within 30 days of receiving the complaint, with a possible extension of 15 days at the discretion of the Commission if sufficient cause is shown.
India Law Library Docid # 2400577

(804) J. NAGI REDDY MANAGING PARTNER, SRI MEENAKSHI BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS Vs. RAVI SHANKAR AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — First Appeal — Consumer Complaint filed for refund of amount paid for a flat due to disputed land title — State Commission allowed the complaint directing refund with interest and litigation cost — Appellant challenged the order arguing complaint was time-barred, a civil dispute, and no deficiency in service — Appeal dismissed as builder was aware of title dispute and failed to disclose it to the complainant, constituting unfair trade practice and def
India Law Library Docid # 2400572

(805) M/S. CLINIC NALLAM AND ANOTHER Vs. A. HELEN VICTORIA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against State Commission order — Medical Negligence — Foreign object left during surgery — Complaint filed within limitation period of knowledge of foreign object.
India Law Library Docid # 2400574

(806) M/S. SWARNA MOTORS Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986; Section 21 — Complaint against repudiation of insurance claim — Fire incident — Complainant, a proprietorship firm, filed a claim under a Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy after a fire incident. The insurance company repudiated the claim based on the surveyor's report which assessed the loss at a much lower amount than claimed. The complainant challenged the repudiation on grounds of delay in claim settlement and error in the surveyor's report. The insurance
India Law Library Docid # 1882333

(807) HDFC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. VIKRAMBHAI RANCHODDAS RANA[GUJARAT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 15 — Appeal against order allowing consumer complaint — Insurance claim rejection challenged — Insured failed to disclose pre-existing diabetes at the time of policy application — Medical records and discharge summary confirmed diabetes as a contributing factor in death — Insurance contract is based on utmost good faith — Suppression of material fact regarding health condition constitutes a breach of good faith — Insurance company has the right to cancel t
India Law Library Docid # 2400579

(808) M/S. SWARNA MOTORS Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND 2 OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Insurance claim repudiation — Fire and Special Perils Policy — Complaint filed against repudiation of insurance claim for fire incident.
India Law Library Docid # 2400566

(809) MONIKA DHINGRA AND OTHERS Vs. PIONEER URBAN LAND & INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED AND 3 OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(a)(i) — Jurisdiction of National Commission — Pecuniary Jurisdiction — Complaint admitted and proceeded to final arguments — Issue of pecuniary jurisdiction not to be reconsidered at final stage if principle reiterated by larger bench.
India Law Library Docid # 2400567

(810) M/S. REDDY VEERANNA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD. Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-11-2023
Insurance Law Claims Construction Project Risk Insurance Repudiation Basis Cessation of Work Exclusion Burden of Proof Unprecedented Rains Farmers' Protest Work Progress Register Surveyor's Report Addendum to Survey Report Non-disclosure of Cessation Violation of Policy Conditions Burden of proof lies on the insurer to establish that the cessation of work occurred and that the loss was a direct consequence of it, to invoke the exclusion clause. The evidence on record, including a Wo
India Law Library Docid # 2400568

(811) ANUBHAV SINGHAL AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. RAHEJA DEVELOPERS LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — Onus on opposite party to prove complainant is not a consumer — Bald statement without evidence is insufficient — Relationships between complainants not relevant to consumer status.
India Law Library Docid # 2400569

(812) AVALON ROJECTS (A UNIT OF GRJ DISTRIBUTORS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.) Vs. NARENDER KUMAR GOYAL[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 2(1)(d) Consumer Allotment of flat for investment does not automatically disqualify individual from being a consumer if no evidence supports commercial purpose of purchase and sale of flats for profit. Burden of proof on developer to establish commercial intent.
India Law Library Docid # 2400570

(813) VIPUL MOTORS PVT. LTD. Vs. PADMINI JOSHI AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Re-appreciation of evidence — Revisional jurisdiction is not for re-assessing or re-appreciating evidence when lower forums have concurrent findings of fact based on evidence — Interference is only permissible if findings are perverse or lower forums acted without jurisdiction — Perverse findings arise from evidence not produced, conjecture, surmises, or non-consideration of material evidence — Revisional power is limited to pri
India Law Library Docid # 2400571

(814) B.B. CHOPRA S/O KRISHAN LAL NOW DECEASED THROUGH HIS LRS Vs. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, HARYANA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (HSIDC) AND OTHERS[HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in service — Allotment of plot — Complainant applied for a commercial plot in 1986, made various payments towards consideration, but the allotment was cancelled and a refund was issued. Subsequent requests for reallocation were made, but eventually, the respondent admitted a sum of Rs. 70,000/- was payable to the complainant. The District Consumer Commission allowed the complaint, directing a refund with interest. The appeal was filed by the complainant
India Law Library Docid # 2400580

(815) ANSAL HOUSING LIMITED (ERSTWHILE ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LIMITED Vs. MR. VIKAS AGARWAL[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 41 — Appeal to State Commission — Limitation Period — Appeal against District Commission order must be filed within 30 days, extendable by State Commission if sufficient cause shown — However, further proviso states that if ordered to pay, appellant must deposit 50% of amount or Rs. 35,000 (whichever is less) for appeal to be entertained.
India Law Library Docid # 2400576

(816) BRIJ MOHAN Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Jurisdiction of National Commission — National Commission has jurisdiction to revise orders passed by State Commission, subject to conditions of the Act.
India Law Library Docid # 2400498

(817) PITHAMBER R. POLSANI AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. PIONEER URBAN LAND & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Consumer complaint for possession and ancillary reliefs — Jurisdiction — Sale consideration of flat mentioned as Rs.62,00,000/-. Pecuniary jurisdiction of the Commission to entertain the complaint held to be lacking based on the sale consideration alone.
India Law Library Docid # 2400494

(818) P.B. VISHNU ALIAS NAVNEETH VISHNU Vs. THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 2(1)(g), 2(1)(d), 13, 14 — Deficiency in service — Unfair trade practice — Bank's offer of 18% interest on fixed deposits was unauthorized by law, as only the Board of Directors, not the Executive Committee, had the power to fix interest rates — Bank acted lawfully in attempting to rectify this error by reducing the interest rate to the legally permissible 15% — Complainant's parents, as guardians, agreed to this reduction, surrendered the original deposi
India Law Library Docid # 2400495

(819) LIBERTY VIDEOCON GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SULAKSHNA DEVI AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 19, 21(a)(ii) Appeals against State Commission order Insurance claim Vehicle accident Complainant's car damaged by waterlogging Insurance company raised issue of driver's license validity Complainant argued vehicle suffered constructive total loss Held, insurance company failed to prove license was fake or fraudulent Mere inability to verify license records due to missing register does not invalidate it Onus on insurer to prove willful breach by in
India Law Library Docid # 2400497

(820) ASHWANI SHARMA Vs. SIRDA GROUP OF INSTITUTIONS NAULAKHA [HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Unfair Trade Practice — Institute admitted student for a course, collected fees, and later denied admission due to a mistake in the admission form, causing the student to lose a year. The student had applied for the 2nd year but wrongly filled the form. The institute rectified the mistake upon request, but the student had already suffered a loss of time. The institute admitted that only the security amount was refundable.
India Law Library Docid # 1882296