ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(801) MR. SHAMEEM UDDIN Vs. THE COUNTRY HEAD OF KUWAIT AIRWAYS AND OTHERS [DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-07-2023
The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint are that the Complainant is engaged in the business of handicraft export. The Complainant bought a round trip air ticket from Delhi-Kuwait-London from office of Kuwait Airways, New Delhi to attend the Spring Fair International in U.K. in which the Complainant had booked a booth, scheduled to be held in the first week of February 2019. On 01.02.2019, the Complainant embarked on flight no. KU 384 Delhi-Kuwait-London. However,
India Law Library Docid # 1882105

(802) HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA PVT. LTD. Vs. HARPAL SINGH AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-07-2023
This Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/ Opposite Party No. 3 against Respondents/Complainant and Opposite Parties No. 1 and 2 challenging the common impugned Order dated 08.08.2018 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.T. Chandigarh, in First Appeal bearing Nos. 27 of 2018 and 23 of 2018. Vide such Order, the State Commission had modified the Order dated 01.12.2017 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T. Chandigarh, in Consumer C
India Law Library Docid # 1882318

(803) COMMODORE (R) VIJAY KUMAR GAUTAM NM Vs. STERLING HOLIDAY RESORTS AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-07-2023
This Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/ Complainant against Respondents/Opposite Parties challenging the impugned Order dated 30.07.2021 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UT Chandigarh, in Appeal bearing No. A/304/2019. Vide such Order, the State Commission had dismissed the Appeal while upholding the Order dated 18.11.2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, UT Chandigarh, in Consumer Complaint No. CC/522/2018. The brief facts o
India Law Library Docid # 1882314

(804) S.M. EINT (BRICK) UDYOG Vs. RAMKESH [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-07-2023
This revision petition has been filed under Section 58 (1)(b) of the Act 2019 in challenge to the Order dated 23.01.2023 of the State Commission in Appeal no. 22 of 2022 arising out of the Order dated 24.12.2021 of the District Commission in Complaint no. 10 of 2021. We have heard the learned counsel of the Petitioner and have perused the record including inter alia the Order dated 24.12.2021 of the District Commission, the impugned Order dated 23.01.2023 of the State Commission and the Petition
India Law Library Docid # 1882315

(805) ICICI BANK LTD. Vs. DIGAMBER VAMAN GURJAR AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-07-2023
The present Revision Petitions (RPs) has been filed by the Petitioner against Respondent(s) as detailed above, under section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 29.11.2019 and 27.01.2020 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Mumbai, (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in First Appeal (FA) No. in 939/2019, 940/2019, 941/2019, 942/2019, 943/2019; and in RP/180/2019, RP/220/2019 and RP/1/2020 in which order dated 17.07.2019 and 1
India Law Library Docid # 1882319

(806) PUNJAB URBAN PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. RAJBIR SINGH GILL AND OTHERS [PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-07-2023
By this common order of ours, two Appeals i.e. First Appeal No.817 of 2022 and First Appeal No.818 of 2022 shall be disposed off as the same have been filed to challenge the common impugned orders dated 05.04.2021 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Faridkot (in short the District Commission) whereby the Consumer Complaint Nos.05 of 2020 and 292 of 2019 filed by respondents/complainants have been allowed by issuing directions to the appellant/OP- Punjab Urban Planning
India Law Library Docid # 1882102

(807) CHINMAY CHOWDHURY Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-07-2023
The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner against Respondents, as detailed above, under section 58 ( 1) (b) of Consumer Protection Act 2019, against the order dated 24.09.2021 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in First Appeal (FA) No.RBR/A/43 of 2019 in which order dated 21.12.2016 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Siliguri (hereinafter referred to as District Commission)
India Law Library Docid # 1882313

(808) M/S. GAGAN GASTO CARE Vs. PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LTD. AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-07-2023
The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner against Respondents as detailed above, under section 58(1)(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, against the order dated 05.11.2020 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in First Appeal (FA) No. 225/2020 in which order dated 12.12.2019 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bathinda (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Consumer Complaint (C
India Law Library Docid # 1882316

(809) M/S. HOTEL LEELAVENURE LTD, MUMBAI Vs. NEW INDIAASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-07-2023
This consumer complaint under Section 21 (a) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act) is filed alleging deficiency in service and seeking compensation with interest in respect of loss suffered on account of repudiation of a claim under two insurance policies issued by the opposite parties. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the Complainant, M/s Hotel Leelaventure Ltd., Mumbai (a Five-Star Deluxe Hotel), claimed an amount of Rs.5,98,42,267/- as compensation along with p
India Law Library Docid # 1882317

(810) SMT. DIMPY KHANNA AND OTHERS Vs. DR. A. S. SOIN AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-07-2023
Primary liver cancer is the third most common cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Despite careful selection for liver transplantation (LT) of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), HCC may still recur after LT and is frequently associated with dismal outcome. The present Complaint has been filed under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act, 1986) by the Complainants against the Dr. A. S. Soin & Medanta Hospital for the alleged medical negligence causing d
India Law Library Docid # 1882222

(811) SURESH PRASAD GUPTA Vs. M.D TATA MOTORS AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-07-2023
This Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/ Complainant against the Respondents / Opposite Parties challenging the impugned Order dated 10.08.2016 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Patna, Bihar, in Appeal bearing No. 220 of 2015. Vide such Order, the State Commission had allowed the Appeal while setting aside the Order dated 18.06.2015 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Rohtas (Sasaram), in Case No. 13/2013. The brief facts of the case are that the Comp
India Law Library Docid # 1882241

(812) CHANDA RAJESH AGARWAL Vs. KEYSTONE REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-07-2023
This Consumer Complaint has been filed under Section 21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking refund and other ancillary reliefs. The brief facts leading upto the present Complaint are that the Complainant had booked and been allotted a residential Flat bearing No. 604 on the Sixth Floor admeasuring 934 sq. ft. carpet area in the Project of the Opposite Party namely, Rustomjee Summit situated at Rajendra Nagar, Borivali (East), Mumbai-400066 for self-use vide Booking Agreement dated
India Law Library Docid # 1882312

(813) M/S. GLOBAL HOSPITAL Vs. P. MANJULA AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 05-07-2023
These two First Appeals (FAs) have been filed under section 19 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 04.11.2016 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Telangana, Hyderabad, (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in Consumer Complaint (CC) No. 18 of 2012. FA 1722 of 2016 has been filed by the Appellant, who was OP-1 before the State Commission in the said CC 18 of 2012, inter alia praying for setting aside the order dated 04.11.2016 of the State Commis
India Law Library Docid # 1882322

(814) UTTARAKHAND POWER CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. MUNFAIT ALI KHAN [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-07-2023
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 20.10.2016 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttarakhand, Dehradun, (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in First Appeal (FA) No. 11 of 2011 in which order dated 08.12.2010 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Haridwar (hereinafter referred to as District Commission) in
India Law Library Docid # 1882244

(815) LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA Vs. JAGJIT AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-07-2023
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 05.07.2017 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in First Appeal No. 994/2016 in which order dated 30.08.2016 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jhajjar (hereinafter referred to as District Commission) in Consumer Complaint
India Law Library Docid # 1882290

(816) RAHUL JAIN Vs. M/S. EXACT DEVELOPERS AND PROMOTERS LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-07-2023
Heard Mr. Raunak Jain, Advocate, for the complainant and Dr. Bipin K. Dwivedi, Advocate, for the opposite party. Rahul Jain has filed above complaint for directing the opposite party to (i) refund Rs.6264063/- with interest @18% per annum from the date of respective deposit till its realization; (ii) pay Rs.1000000/-, as compensation for mental agony and harassment; (iii) pay Rs.200000/- as litigation costs; and (iv) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances
India Law Library Docid # 1882230

(817) PRAMOD KUMAR Vs. HDFC STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-07-2023
Pramod Kumar has filed above complaint for directing the opposite party to (i) pay insurance claim of Rs.1 crore with interest @18% per annum from the date of claim till the date of payment; (ii) pay Rs.5 lakhs, for deficiency in service; (iii) pay Rs.10 lakhs, for mental agony and harassment; (iv) pay Rs.75000/-, towards litigation costs; and (v) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts of the case. The complainant stated that he was the brother and nominee of the deceased l
India Law Library Docid # 1882297

(818) SMT. MAMTA NEGI W/O LATE DINKAR NEGI AND OTHERS Vs. ADITYA BIRLA CAPITAL SUN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED ONE INDIABULLS CENTRE AND OTHERS [UTTARAKHAND STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 27-06-2023
This consumer complaint under Section 12 read with Section 18 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by Smt. Mamta Negi along with her minor children - Karan Negi and Parth Negi (hereinafter to be referred to as complainants) against Aditya Birla Capital Sun Life Insurance Company Limited and Branch Manager, Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited - opposite parties, alleging deficiency in service on their part in repudiating the insurance claim in question.
India Law Library Docid # 1882195

(819) MADHUGITA MADHUKAR SUKHATME Vs. M/S. YOGESH AND YOGESH JOSHI AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 26-06-2023
Mrs. Madhugita Madhukar Sukhatme has filed above complaint for directing the opposite parties to (i) provide office space for the condominium, watchman cabin, Fire refuge area on 8th floor, replace one lift with Stretcher lift; (ii) handover 9 remaining parking space i.e. 7 stilt parking and 2 open parking, within stipulated period; (iii) obtain completion certificate of the building Manas Apartment Condominium, within stipulated period, failing which pay penalty of Rs.5000/- per day; (iv) hando
India Law Library Docid # 1882209

(820) ASHISH VOHRA Vs. M/S. RAHEJA DEVELOPERS LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 26-06-2023
Heard Ms. Padmapriya, Advocate, for the complainant and Mr. Siddharth Banthia, Advocate, for the opposite party. Ashish Vohra has filed above complaint, for directing the opposite party to (i) handover possession of the unit allotted to him in the project Raheja Revanta and pay delay compensation in the form of interest @18% per annum on his deposit, from due date of possession till the delivery of possession; (ii) pay Rs.1000000/-, as compensation for deficiency in service, mental agony and har
India Law Library Docid # 1882364