ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(821) M/S. AJAY T.V. CENTRE TIBRI ROAD Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 23-06-2023
This revision petition under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act) assails the order dated 05.12.2014 in First Appeal No. 920 of 2012 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (in short, the State Commission) allowing the appeal and dismissing order dated 21.03.2012 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Gurdaspur (in short, the District Forum) in Consumer Complaint no. 408 of 2011.
India Law Library Docid # 1882183

(822) DYNAMETIC OVERSEAS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. NEW INDIAASSURANCE CO. LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-06-2023
This Consumer Complaint has been filed under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act) alleging deficiency in service in repudiation of an insurance claim in a Marine Cargo Specific Voyage Policy issued by the Opposite Party in respect of transportation of a cargo of Iron Ore fines in bulk. The facts, in brief, as stated by the complainant, are that the complainant formerly registered as R. Piyarelall International Private Limited., (RPIL) for the business of import and export of Min
India Law Library Docid # 1882203

(823) GEETIKA MALLAN AND ANOTHER Vs. JAIPRAKASH ASSOCIATES LIMITED [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-06-2023
This complaint under section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act) has been filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in delay in offering possession of a flat booked by them with the opposite party and in charging an additional amount by arbitrarily increasing the super area of the flat. The relevant facts of the case as per the complainant, in brief, are that they had booked a residential unit on 30.11.2007 admeasuring approximately 2380 sq.ft
India Law Library Docid # 1882205

(824) RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD Vs. DEVENDRA KUMAR [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-06-2023
This revision petition under section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act) assails the order dated 08.05.2014 in Appeal No. 814 of 2012 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench-II, Jaipur, Rajasthan (in short, the State Commission) dismissing the appeal and upholding order dated 22.05.2012 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jodhpur (in short, the District Forum) in Consumer Case no. 771 of 2010. The facts of the case according to th
India Law Library Docid # 1882232

(825) MURUGESEN Vs. BANK OF BARODA AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-06-2023
The facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainant is an agriculturist owing agricultural land who obtained a loan to establish a poultry farm followed by subsequent loans for extension of the farm and erection of the poultry feed mill. The total loan amount was Rs.3,02,00,000/-. The complainant states that as required by the bank, the insurance premium in respect of the loan was paid directly to the insurance company from the account of the complainant by the opposite party. On account o
India Law Library Docid # 1882292

(826) M/S. MOTIA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. Vs. PUNJAB [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-06-2023
The present First Appeal (FA) has been filed by the Appellant against Respondent as detailed above, under section 19 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 24.04.2018 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in Consumer Complaint (CC) no 886 of 2017 inter alia praying to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and final order dated 24.04.2018 passed by the State Commission. The Appellant was the Opposite P
India Law Library Docid # 1882291

(827) VIVEK GARG AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. SHIPRA ESTATE LTD. & JAI KRISHNA ESTATEDEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-06-2023
Heard Mr. Chandrachur Bhattacharyya, Advocate, for the complainants, Mr. Chaitanya, Advocate, for opposite party No.1 and Mr.Animesh Tripathi, Advocate, for opposite party No.2. Sh. Vivek Garg and Smt. Sarita Garg have filed the above complaint for directing the opposite parties to (i) handover possession of the flat No. OAK 802 allotted to them within stipulated period and if possession is not handed over within time fixed, then to pay penalty thereafter; (ii) pay delay compensation in the form
India Law Library Docid # 1882213

(828) PRIYANKA TANDON AND ANOTHER Vs. BHATIA GLOBAL HOSPITAL & ENDOSURGERY INSTITUTE & OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-06-2023
In September 2008, the couple Priyanka Tandon & Dinesh Tandon (the Complainants), on advice of Dr. Archana Dhawan Bajaj (OP-5), approached Bhatia Global Hospital and Endosurgery Institute (for short Bhatia Hospital-OP-1) at New Delhi for Intra-Cytoplasmic Sperm injection (ICSI). The OP-4 Dr. Indu Bhatia and OP-5 have assured the couple about the success of ICSI.
India Law Library Docid # 1882143

(829) MOHAMMAD YUSUF RAZA Vs. INDORE TRANSPORT AGENCY [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-06-2023
This Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act), challenging the Order dated 09.04.2014 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhattisgarh (in short, the State Commission) in F.A. No. 207 of 2013, whereby the State Commission, while dismissing the Appeal before it, upheld the Order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (in short, the District Forum) in CC No. 357 of 2010
India Law Library Docid # 1882215

(830) BABY SAMHITHA K.S AND OTHERS Vs. CLOUD NINE AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-06-2023
The present Complaint has been filed under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by Baby Samhitha K.S (minor), through her father Satish K.M (Complainant No. 1), Satish K.M (Complainant No. 2) & Sri. Halappa G.V (Complainant No. 3) against the Cloud Nine Hospital (OP-1) & its doctors Dr. Prakash Kini (OP-2) & Dr. Rekha (OP-3) for the alleged medical negligence. On 09.12.2013, Dr. Ganga H. R. (since deceased, for short the patient) was admitted to Cloud Nine Hospital (OP-1) for her Caes
India Law Library Docid # 1882365

(831) NEW INDIA ASS. CO. LTD. Vs. AJITBHAI R. PATEL [GUJARAT STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-06-2023
This appeal has been preferred by the original opponent No.2, i.e. Insurance Company, since being aggrieved by the order of direction to pay sum of Rs.6,64,500/- together with interest @ of 9%p.a, compensation Rs. 10,000/- for harassment and mental agony and cost of Rs. 3000/- to the complainant vide order dated 19/09/2015 of District Forum, Ahmedabad (Additional) in complaint No. 948 of 2014.
India Law Library Docid # 1881902

(832) AMARJIT KAUR W/O. SHRI JOGINDER SINGH Vs. KOTAK MAHINDRA OLD MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE LTD. & ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-06-2023
This Revision Petition has been filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by Amarjit Kaur (hereinafter referred to as the Complainant) against the Order dated 22.01.2016 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, (for short the State Commission) in First Appeal No. 1362 of 2013, wherein the Appeal filed by the Appellant (Respondent herein) was allowed and the Order dated 30.08.2013 passed by District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, SAS Nagar, Mohali (for
India Law Library Docid # 1882186

(833) SUNCITY PROJECT PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. LT. COLONET BRIJESH KUMAR SINGH [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-06-2023
This order shall dispose of First Appeal No.980 of 2022 filed by the Opposite Party, i.e., Suncity Projects Private Limited (hereinafter referred as the Appellant) and First Appeal No.1024 of 2022 filed by Lt. Col. Brijesh Kumar Singh (hereinafter referred as (the Complainant). Both these Appeals have arisen out of the order dated 28.10.2022 of the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short the State Commission) in Complaint No.216 of 2021 whereby the Complaint had been allowe
India Law Library Docid # 1882240

(834) PANKAJ MAHESHWARI Vs. S.B.I. GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-06-2023
The Office has reported that the appeal has been filed with delay of 42 days. The impugned order has been passed on 18.08.2020 and the appeal was filed on 06.11.2020. During this period, Supreme Court has waived limitation in Suo Motu Writ Petition No.3 of 2020. Therefore, there is no question for delay. The appellant has filed IA/11/2021 for condoning the delay. IA/11/2021 is allowed. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The complainant has filed above appeal against the order of State Consu
India Law Library Docid # 1882295

(835) LALIT KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. M/S. E-HOMES INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-06-2023
The present Consumer Complaint is filed under Section 58(1)(a)(i)(ii) accompanied with Application under Section 35(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in a representative capacity by the Complainants belonging to the Dasnac-Jewel of Noida Project/ Phase 1 (hereinafter referred to as Project) of the Opposite Party No. 1, the Builder, NOIDA Authority and office of Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits. Brief facts of the case as per the Complaint
India Law Library Docid # 1882229

(836) DR. SHAILENDER DHAWAN Vs. DIGVIJAY ADVOCATE AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-06-2023
Above revision petition has been filed against the order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana, dated 18.01.2018, passed in First Appeal No.784 of 2016 (arising out of the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad, dated 15.06.2016 passed in CC No.48 of 2013), whereby District Forum has partly allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner (opposite party-1) to pay Rs.500000/- as the compensation and State Commission has dismissed the appeal. Mr. Digvij
India Law Library Docid # 1882238

(837) GTFS MULTI SERVICES LTD. Vs. SMT. PRAVATI BEHERA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-06-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — The case involves a dispute over an insurance claim following the accidental death, who had a Janata Personal Accident Insurance Policy — The claim was not settled by the insurance company, leading to legal proceedings —The main issue is whether there was a deficiency in service by the insurance company and its agent in settling the claim — The petitioner contends that they acted only as a facilitator and forwarded all necessary documents to the in
India Law Library Docid # 2415661

(838) CDR. RAJESH RAJGOPALAN AND OTHERS Vs. M/S. VATIKA LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-06-2023
This order will dispose a complaint filed under section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act) alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the opposite party, a builder, in delay in handing over possession of the flats booked by the complainants and related issues. A separate application under section 12(1)(c) read with section 22 of the Act was filed by the complainants seeking permission to file the complaint by consumers having same interest which was allo
India Law Library Docid # 1882234

(839) M/S. SOUTH BENGAL AGRO PRODUCTS Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-06-2023
The present Consumer Complaint has been filed by Complainant under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Complainant is a Partnership firm carrying on business of paddy, rice, broken rice, husk and bran. The Complainant had taken Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy No.031603/11/13/11/00000058 valid from 21.05.2013 to 20.05.2014 covering his business as well as plant & machinery for sum of Rs.5,09,50,000/-. Case of the Complainant is that on 08.11.2013, about 6:50 am, fire brok
India Law Library Docid # 1882239

(840) PALANADU COLD STORAGE Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-06-2023
The Complainant is a cold storage and acts as a custodian for the agricultural produce stored by the farmers. The Complainant obtained a Standard Fire & Special Perils Policy No.566018111310000062 for a sum of Rs.14 crores (Rs.4 crores for building, plant & machinery and Rs.10 crores for stock) valid from 30.03.2014 to 29.03.2015 from National Insurance Company Limited. On 09.09.2014, vide endorsement No.566018111382100004, the sum insured was enhanced from Rs.14 crores to Rs.19.5 crores (Rs.5,5
India Law Library Docid # 1882294