(861) DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, NORTHERN RAILWAY AND OTHERS Vs. BIRENDERA KUMAR PASWAN [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-06-2023 This revision under section 58(1)(b) of the Act 2019 is in challenge to the Order dated 09.06.2022 of the State Commission in appeal no. 58 of 2022 arising out of the Order dated 04.04.2022 of the District Commission in complaint no. 904 of 2019. We have heard the learned counsel for the revisionists (the railways) and the respondent in person (the complainant) and have perused the record including inter alia the Order dated 04.04.2022 of the District Commission, the impugned Order dated 09.06.2 India Law Library Docid # 1882224
(862) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. M/S SHARMA AGENCY [PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-06-2023 The appellants/OPs No.1 and 2 i.e. United India Insurance Company Limited and another, through its Assistant Manager have filed the present appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short the Act) to challenge the impugned order dated 08.03.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Moga (hereinafter referred as the District Commission), whereby the complaint filed by the respondents-complainants was partly allowed against OPs No.1 and 2. It would India Law Library Docid # 1882370
(863) PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LIMITED Vs. SUNITA RAHEJA AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-05-2023 The present Appeal has been filed against the Order dated against the Order dated 11.03.2015, passed by the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at New Delhi (hereinafter to be referred to as the State Commission) in Complaint Case No. 174 of 2012, whereby the Complaint, filed by Mrs. Sunita Raheja (hereinafter to be referred to as the Complainant/Respondent) was allowed and the Opposite Party/Appellant herein i.e. Parsvnath Developers Limited (hereinafter referredto as the Appella India Law Library Docid # 1873311
(864) MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR AUTOMOBILES DIVISION AND OTHERS Vs. SHAILESH KUMAR SINGH S/O SHRI SHARDA PRASAD SINGH AND OTHERS [HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-05-2023 Briefly, the case of the complainant is that on 30.06.2017, the complainant purchased car (KUV100 K4 6str) from opposite party No.3 (Snow View Automobiles Pvt. Ltd), for a total consideration of Rs.5,18,494/-. The said vehicle was manufactured by opposite party No.1(Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd). The vehicle in question got insured from opposite party No.4 (New India Assurance Company Ltd) through opposite party No.5 (insurance broker) and vehicle was financed from opposite party No.6 (State Bank of India Law Library Docid # 1882095
(865) ANIL KUMAR APPAN & 2 OTHERS Vs. M/S. A R LANDCRAFT LLP & ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-05-2023 Anil Kumar Appan, Dilip Raj and Mrs. Lalita Rani have filed above complaint, for directing the opposite parties to (i) refund Rs.5953370/- with interest @15% per annum from the date of respective deposit till the date of refund; (ii) pay Rs.500000/-, as costs of litigation; and (iii) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. India Law Library Docid # 1882146
(866) RUJDAR KHAN Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-05-2023 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 26.09.2017 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan, (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), in Consumer Complaint (CC) No. 89 of 2016 inter alia praying for quashing the impugned order dated 26.09.2017 of the State Commission. India Law Library Docid # 1882153
(867) J.PRAKASH Vs. THE MANAGER [TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-05-2023 The unsuccessful complainant has filed the present Appeal being aggrieved by the Order, dated 22.01.2019, passed by the DCDRF, Chennai South, in C.C. No.216 of 2015, dismissing his complaint filed against the present respondents/OPs therein-Insurance Company. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to in the course of this Order as per their respective rankings before the District Forum. Since the actual point in issue lies in a very narrow compass, it is unnecessary to burden this India Law Library Docid # 1882206
(868) HARISH GAS AGENCIES Vs. JAYANTHI [TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-05-2023 The present Revision is filed by the 1st OP in the main C.C. as against the order, dated 20.07.2022, passed by the DCDRC, Vellore, in allowing the petition/CMP No.4 of 2021 in C.C. No.41 of 2010 that was filed by the complainants/respondents-1 and 2 herein, seeking to condone the delay of 33 days in filing of the Complaint. Before the District Commission, it is the case of the complainants/respondents-1 and 2 herein that the complaint was filed in the year 2010; that, for the reason that the com India Law Library Docid # 1882236
(869) PROPRIETOR Vs. GAS AGENCIES, H.P. GAS DISTRIBUTORS [TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-05-2023 The present Revision is filed by the 1st OP in the main C.C. as against the order, dated 20.07.2022, passed by the DCDRC, Vellore, in allowing the petition/CMP No.4 of 2021 in C.C. No.41 of 2010 that was filed by the complainants/respondents-1 and 2 herein, seeking to condone the delay of 33 days in filing of the Complaint. Before the District Commission, it is the case of the complainants/respondents-1 and 2 herein that the complaint was filed in the year 2010; that, for the reason that the com India Law Library Docid # 1882243
(870) MR. ABHIMANYU SINGH BIKA Vs. GRJ DISTRIBUTORS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. [DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-05-2023 The present appeal has been filed on 10.12.2020 impugning order dated 21.10.2020 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-VI (New District), M-Block, Vikas Bhawan, I.P. Estate, New Delhi-110001 in CC No. 87/2020. Along with this appeal, an application (IA No.302/2020) seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal has also been filed. Therefore, before deciding the present appeal on merits, the pending application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal is yet to be India Law Library Docid # 1882360
(871) AARAM HOSPITAL, MOTA MANDIR ROAD AND OTHERS Vs. JIGNISHABEN PRADEEPBHAI SHAH STATION ROAD AND OTHERS [GUJARAT STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-05-2023 These two appeals have been arisen out of order and judgment dated 18th October 2013 by the District Commission, Surat (Additional) in Complaint No. 259/2011 (old case no. 183/2004). The District Commission has directed opponents to pay Rs.63,000/- together with the interest @ 9% p.a., compensation of Rs.2,000/- and also cost of Rs.1,000/-. Being aggrieved by the said order, original opponents have preferred Appeal No. 2006 of 2013 and prayed for setting aside the order, whereas the complainants India Law Library Docid # 1881908
(872) LT. COL. (RETD.) J.S. AHLUWALIA Vs. FORTIS HOSPITAL & 4 OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-05-2023 The First Appeal has been filed under section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short the Act) against the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab (in short, the State Commission) in CC No. 13/2016, whereby the Complaint was dismissed. India Law Library Docid # 1882134
(873) DR. S. MOHANKUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. MANGAYARKARASI AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-05-2023 This Order shall decide both the first appeals arising from the impugned Judgment /Order dated 03.02.2012 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Puducherry (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) in Dispute no. 2/2006, wherein the State Commission allowed the complaint and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.12,00,000/- & Rs.2,00,000/- towards costs. India Law Library Docid # 1882141
(874) SUMAN SHARMA & OTHERS Vs. M/S. AYUSHMAN HOSPITAL & OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-05-2023 The present Complaint has been filed under Section 21(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, the Act 1986) by the Complainant - Suman Sharma & 3 Ors. against the Opposite Parties - M/s. Ayushman Hospital & its 2 doctors for the alleged medical negligence and wrong treatment which resulted into untimely death of the kin of the Complainants. India Law Library Docid # 1882144
(875) BAJAJ CAPITAL LIMITED Vs. SUNITA TAK & 3 OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-05-2023 This Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/ Opposite Party No. 2 against Respondents /Complainants and Opposite Parties Nos. 1 & 3 challenging the impugned Order dated 09.01.2017 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur, Rajasthan, in First Appeal bearing No. 890 of 2016. Vide such order, the State Commission dismissed the Appeal at the stage of admission while upholding the Order dated 30.03.2016 passed by the District Consumer Protection Forum, Ajmer, in Compla India Law Library Docid # 1882147
(876) SMT. PARAMJEET KAUR Vs. DR. S.K. BANSAL & OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-05-2023 This complaint has been filed under Section 21(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by Mrs. Paramjeet Kaur, the widow of late Rajinder Singh, (hereinafter referred to as the Complainant) against the Maharaja Agarsain Hospital (OP-2), Dr. S.K. Bansal (OP-1), Dr. Kailash Nath Singla (OP-3) & Sunder Lal Jain Hospital (OP-4), for the alleged medical negligence caused by OPs, resulting in the death of the Complainants husband. India Law Library Docid # 1882167
(877) RAJENDRA SADANAND JUJARE & 2 OTHERS Vs. DR. LATA M. PATIL & 2 OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-05-2023 The present Complaint has been filed under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by Naveen Chillai, the GPA holder for the Complainants (hereinafter referred to as the Complainant) against the Mitanshu Polyclinic & Hospital (OP-2), Dr. Lata M. Patil Gynecologist and Obstetrician (OP-1) & Dr. Mali-Anaesthetist (OP-3) for the alleged medical negligence. India Law Library Docid # 1882169
(878) SURESH KUMAR PROPRIETOR JAI DURGA POLYMERS Vs. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-05-2023 This Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/ Complainant against Respondent / Opposite Party challenging the impugned Order dated 09.04.2018 passed by the State Commission, Delhi, in First Appeal bearing No. 229 of 2015. Vide such Order, the State Commission allowed the Appeal while setting aside the Order dated 16.07.2014 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-VI, I.P. Estate, New Delhi in Case No. CC/689/10. India Law Library Docid # 1882185
(879) M/S. GAGAN RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHER [CHHATTISGARH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-05-2023 This complaint, under section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been filed by the complainant alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in not paying the amount of its insurance claim and seeking directions to them for payment of loss suffered due to spontaneous combustion in the sponge iron stock of Rs.29,70,000/-(Twenty Nine Lacs Seventy Thousand) along with interest @ 18% p.a. from the India Law Library Docid # 1882204
(880) THE AUTHORISED SIGNATORY CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LTD AND OTHERS Vs. THE PRINCIPAL MEMS ENGLISH MEDIUM SCHOOL AND OTHERS [KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 29-05-2023 This is an appeal filed under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against the order in C.C. No. 232/2022 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Malappuram (District Commission for short). As per the order dated 10.03.2023, the District Commission allowed the complaint and the opposite parties were directed as under: India Law Library Docid # 1881915