ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(841) 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

(842) 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

(843) 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

(844) 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

(845) 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

(846) 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

(847) 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

(848) MANAGER, INDUSIND BANK LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs. SANJAY GHOSH [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-08-2023
The present Revision Petition ( RP) has been filed by the Petitioners against the Respondent as detailed above, under section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 27.11.2018 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission West Bengal ( hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) in First Appeal ( FA) No. 142 of 2015 in which order dated 27.11.2014 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Howrah ( hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Cons
India Law Library Docid # 1882330

(849) SATYA BRAT JAISWAL Vs. VEDIC CONCLAVE PRIVATE LIMITED [WEST BENGAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-08-2023
This consumer complaint case has been filed by the complainant under section 34 & 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ( in short, the Act) alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice adopted by the opposite parties No. 1,2 & 4 valued at Rs.71,48,000/- ( Rupees seventy one lakh and forty eight thousand) only. The complainant has filed this consumer complaint case praying for the following reliefs :- Handover the physical possession of the said flat making it habitable by completi
India Law Library Docid # 1882235

(850) AFTAB ISLAM Vs. GOFRAIN MOLLA AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-08-2023
The revisionist has come up against the orders of the District Forum and the State Commission, whereby the complaint of the respondents in relation to the investments in deposit has been accepted, directing the payment of the investment together with 9% interest per annum and compensation has also been awarded together with interest. The case as appears from the pleadings and the orders of the Forums below, unfold the pitiful story of petty investors who deposited their hard earned money in mone
India Law Library Docid # 1882246

(851) BALUSINH SOMSINH NARVE Vs. SATNAM AGRO CENTRE AND OTHER [GUJARAT STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-08-2023
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order of dismissal of complaint, the original complainant had preferred this appeal against the impugned order and judgment dated 4th September 2017 of District Commission, Himmatnagar, in complaint No. 26/2017 and submitted that the District Commission failed to consider contents of complaint, Rejoinder affidavit and also failed to appreciate documents produced on record and thereby caused miscarriage of justice. It is the case of complainant before Distric
India Law Library Docid # 1882276

(852) RASANDIK ELECTRIC VEHICLES PVT. LTD. Vs. AYODHYA PRASAD MISHRA AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-08-2023
Heard Ms. Shivani Mishra, daughter of the complainant and Mr. Anant Agarwal, Advocate for Rasandik Electric Vehicles Pvt. Ltd. None appeared on behalf of Kaushalendra Pratap Singh. The above revision petitions have been filed against the order dated 04.01.2022 of Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow in First Appeals 400/2019 and 918/2019 (arising out of CC/06/2014) whereby the State Commission dismissed both the appeals and affirmed the order of the District Forum.
India Law Library Docid # 1882281

(853) M.S. BAKANKAR Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-08-2023
The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Revision Petitioner against the Respondent as detailed above, under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the Order dated 07.08.2019 of the Madhya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Bhopal (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) in First Appeal (FA) No. 294 of 2018, in which the Order dated 04.09.2018 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Gwalior (hereinafter referred to as the
India Law Library Docid # 1882306

(854) BHARTI AXA LIFE INSURANCE LTD. Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-08-2023
This revision petition under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act) assails the order dated 01.09.2017 in Appeal No. 341 of 2017 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (in short, the State Commission) arising out of order dated 27.03.2017 in Consumer Complaint No. 320 of 2016 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Amritsar (in short, the District Forum). This order will also dispose of RP No. 3295 of 2017 which arises from the same orde
India Law Library Docid # 1882307

(855) TEJAS GOPALJI SOMANI Vs. TATA MOTORS LTD. AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-08-2023
This Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/ Complainant against the Respondents / Opposite Parties challenging the impugned order dated 29.06.2020 passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench at Aurangabad, Mumbai, in First Appeal bearing No. 161 of 2015. Vide such order, the State Commission had allowed the Appeal while setting aside the order dated 03.12.2014 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Nanded, in Complain
India Law Library Docid # 1882112

(856) URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST AND ANOTHER Vs. MAGHA RAM [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-08-2023
This revision petition under section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act) assails the order dated 02.02.2017 in First Appeal no. 238 of 2013 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal, Delhi (in short, the State Commission) which dismissed the appeal against order dated 30.07.2007 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, New Delhi (in short, the District Forum) in Consumer Complaint no. 254/2005 that had allowed the complaint filed by the respondent. I have heard t
India Law Library Docid # 1882117

(857) AJMER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER Vs. SHIV CHARAN SINGH CHAUHAN [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-08-2023
The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioners against Respondent as detailed above, under Section 21 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 29.11.2018 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in First Appeal (FA) No. 353 of 2018 in which order dated 08.05.2018 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Consumer Complain
India Law Library Docid # 1882252

(858) ALOK GUPTA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-08-2023
Heard Mr. Siddharth Srivastava, Advocate, for the petitioner and Ms. Shobha Gupta, Advocate, for the respondents. Above revision has been filed against the order of Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench Kota, dated 28.10.2021, passed in First Appeal No.88 of 2021 (arising from the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kota, dated 31.03.2021 passed in CC/198/2016), whereby District Forum dismissed the complaint and State Commission dismissed the appe
India Law Library Docid # 1882254

(859) MANAGING DIRECTOR & CEO, INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK AND ANOTHER Vs. S.X.J. VASAN, I.R.S. FORMER COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-08-2023
Heard Mr. Arvind Srevastava, Advocate, for S.X.J. Vasan and Ms. Akansha Rathore, Advocate, for Indian Overseas Bank. Above appeals have been filed against the order of Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai, dated 13.01.2022, passed in Consumer Complaint No.175 of 2017, whereby State Commission has partly allowed the complaint and directed Indian Overseas Bank to pay Rs.500000/- as compensation, for wrongful dishonour of the cheque of the complainant. The office has rep
India Law Library Docid # 1882332

(860) INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. SOURAV DAS AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-07-2023
Heard Mr. Sanjoy Kumar Gosh, Advocate, for Sourav Das, Ms. Priya Puri, Advocate, for Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Mr. N.R. Mukerji, Advocate, for M/s Sneha Gas Services and Mr. Saroj Kumar Pandey, Advocate, for National Insurance Co., in above appeals. Above appeals have been filed from the order of West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata, dated 11.03.2020, passed in CC/62/2009, partly allowing the complaint and directing Indian Oil Corporation Limited and M/s. Sneha
India Law Library Docid # 1882320