India Law Library

User not Logged..

Free Artificial Intelligence Case Analyzer

Latest Cases

First
«
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
»
Last

(881) BAJAJ ALLIANZ LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. GEETA DEVI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against order of State Commission — Delay in filing appeal — Condonation of delay — Delay of 183 days in filing appeal was condoned after due consideration of reasons stated in application.
India Law Library Docid # 2400344

(882) RAGHUVEER SINGH Vs. TREHAN HOME DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-10-2023
Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — Sufficient Cause — Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 15 — Special periods of limitation — Object of expeditious adjudication — Delay of 863 days before onset of Covid-19 — Reasons for delay (Covid-19, translation) deemed insufficient — Appellant failed to act with reasonable diligence and bona fide — Condonation of delay application disallowed as per established precedents.
India Law Library Docid # 2400345

(883) MRS. DUNDOO ARUNA KUMARI Vs. Y. NAGA SATISH AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 51 — Appeal against Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's Order — Delay in Filing Appeal — Extension of Limitation — Supreme Court Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020 — Appeal filed within extended limitation period.
India Law Library Docid # 2400346

(884) M/S. AZIZ WALL PAPER Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-10-2023
Insurance — Fire Insurance — Loss of stock due to inundation — Claim rejected by the respondent insurance company on the ground that the complainant failed to cooperate with the surveyor and disposed of the stocks without prior intimation — Held, the complainant had sufficiently cooperated with the surveyor by providing documents and intimating of the inability to segregate the damaged stocks due to their condition — The surveyor's refusal to visit the site for assumed reasons, despite assurance
India Law Library Docid # 2400347

(885) 3BEN'S CONSTRUCTIONS AND OTHERS Vs. BENCY RAGHAVAN[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 25-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act — Delay in filing appeal — Condonation of delay — Applicant must show sufficient cause for delay — Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that a party not acting diligently or remaining inactive is not entitled to condonation of delay.
India Law Library Docid # 2400348

(886) GO DIGIT GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SAURAV SONI S/O HAPPY KUMAR[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-10-2023
Motor Vehicles Insurance Claim disputes Proof of documents Insurance company's reliance on reassessment report and letters from surveyor not proven on record as per law. Surveyor's affidavit mentions submitting a survey report, but this report was not produced by the insurance company, leading to an adverse inference against them.
India Law Library Docid # 2400330

(887) MRS. ALKA WIFE OF MR. VIKRAM SINGH Vs. VYAS HOSPITAL, KOTHI CHOWK, VILLAGE TALWAR, POST OFFICE CHANDPUR, TEHSIL SADAR, DISTRICT BILASPUR, H.P. THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR AND MANAGING DIRECTOR AND OTHER[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Medical Negligence — Deficiency in Service — Death of foetus in womb — Complainant claimed negligence due to delayed cesarean and improper monitoring — Hospital and doctor denied negligence, stating all best practices were followed and hypoxia developed suddenly — Court found that once a patient is admitted, they are under the direct supervision of the hospital and doctor — Evidence suggested that despite the complainant reporting reduced foetal movement, the hosp
India Law Library Docid # 2400331

(888) M/S. INTEC INFONET PVT. LTD Vs. NORTH EASTERN REGION INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (NERIST)[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 24(A) — Limitation — Complaint filed after more than two years of alleged cause of action — Provision allows condonation of delay if sufficient cause is shown — Issue of limitation not framed or contested before State Commission.
India Law Library Docid # 2400333

(889) ANSAL HOUSING LIMITED Vs. MS. SHASHI GARG[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 15 — Appeal — Condonation of Delay — Sufficient Cause — Appeals must be filed within 30 days of the order, with State Commission having power to entertain appeals after expiry if sufficient cause shown.
India Law Library Docid # 2400326

(890) SRIGANESH CHANDRASEKARAN AND OTHERS Vs. M/S. UNISHIRE HOMES LLP AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Sections 12(1)(c), 13(6) and Order 1 Rule 8 of CPC Joint complaint filed by buyers against developer for delayed possession Permission granted for joint complaint as all buyers had common grievance and same interest.
India Law Library Docid # 2400334

(891) M/S. EASTERN MOTOR, AUTHORISE DEALER OF MARUTI SUZUKI IMPHAL Vs. . R.K. SANAYAIMA SINGH[MANIPUR STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Sections 2(9), 2(11), 2(47) — Consumer Rights, Deficiency, Unfair Trade Practice — Appellant, a vehicle dealer, wrongly insured a consumer's personal vehicle under a commercial package policy despite specific requests for a non-commercial policy. Appellant also gave false assurances that the policy could be changed at renewal. When the vehicle required repairs, the insurance claim was denied due to the commercial policy status and lack of commercial permits. The c
India Law Library Docid # 2400332

(892) M/S. BIMAL TEXTILES PANIPAT THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR MR. VIPIN GOYAL Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Discharge Voucher — Whether signed under duress/coercion — Complainant accepted settlement amount via cheque and signed discharge voucher, but subsequently protested, claiming financial hardship and duress — Court considers timing of protest relative to encashment and dispatch of protest letter — Held, encashing cheque and then dispatching protest letter after a delay does not indicate genuine contestation of payment.
India Law Library Docid # 2400299

(893) STATE BANK OF INDIA, MAIN BRANCH, HOSPITAL ROAD, MANSA, DISTRICT MANSA THROUGH IT’S BRANCH MANAGER AND OTHER Vs. YOGTA D/O JATINDERVIR GUPTA[PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer Defined — Education Loan Agreement — Consideration — Agreement of loan executed for consideration, interest received by bank — Complainant not seeking subsidy from Opposite Parties, but alleging deficiency in service for not claiming subsidy — Complainant is a 'Consumer'.
India Law Library Docid # 2400329

(894) LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. KAILASH CHAND VED AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 58(1)(b) — Revision Petitions — Admissibility — Forum powers — National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can entertain revision petitions against orders of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
India Law Library Docid # 2400300

(895) INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED Vs. DILIP GOYAL[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — Loan taken for business purpose — Not a consumer dispute — Held that a loan taken for business needs, such as business expansion or working capital, does not qualify as a consumer dispute under the Consumer Protection Act.
India Law Library Docid # 2400301

(896) DR. ANURADHA Vs. DR. PANDIT AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition powers — Revisional powers are limited and can only be exercised if there is a jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or illegal/irregular exercise of jurisdiction by the lower forum.
India Law Library Docid # 2400276

(897) BRIJ LAL Vs. THE BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. [HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-10-2023
Insurance Claim — Assessment of Loss — Surveyor's Report — A surveyor's report is a crucial document and cannot be disregarded without valid reasons. The complainant failed to provide substantial evidence to challenge the surveyor's assessment or cross-examine the surveyor, thus the district commission was justified in relying on the surveyor's report.
India Law Library Docid # 1882273

(898) DIPTI YOGESH PAREKH Vs. BIRLA SUN LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-10-2023
Insurance Law — Policy Repudiation — Concealment of Material Facts — For repudiation of an insurance policy based on concealment of material facts, the insurer must prove that the information withheld would have influenced a prudent insurer's decision regarding premium or risk acceptance.
India Law Library Docid # 1882352

(899) MANDEEP SINGH JOHAR AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. IREO PVT. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1936 — Consumer Complaint — Allegations — Refund — Delay Compensation — Builder Developer Obligations — Allottees' Rights — Interpretation of Agreement — Demands made by developer are upheld if they are in accordance with the Apartment Buyer's Agreement (ABA).
India Law Library Docid # 2400273

(900) K. KARTHIGA AND OTHERS Vs. HELIOS HOSPITAL AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-10-2023
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Medical Negligence Standard of Care A doctor cannot be held liable for negligence if they followed a practice acceptable to the medical profession at the time, even if a better alternative existed. The standard of care is judged by knowledge available at the time of the incident, not the date of trial.
India Law Library Docid # 2400274

First
«
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
»
Last