(881) A. INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED Vs. MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-09-2023 Companies Act, 2013/1956 — Amendment of Complainant Name — Where a complainant changes its name as per the Companies Act, the amendment of its name in the case records is allowed. India Law Library Docid # 1882289
(882) SATISH KUMAR CHAWLA AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. VATIKA LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — Speculative purpose — Onus on opposite party to prove complainant is not a consumer — Opposite party failed to discharge onus — Contention that complainant is not a consumer rejected. India Law Library Docid # 2400051
(883) PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND OTHERS Vs. SH. PRADEEP KUMAR[STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND DEHRADUN] 19-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15 Appeal against District Consumer Forum order Ex-parte order passed by District Forum without giving adequate opportunity to present defence Bank's request for remand to District Forum for fresh hearing allowed in principle, but appeal decided on merits. India Law Library Docid # 2400056
(884) RAMANAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMA, MANAGEMENT & TECHNOLOGY (RIPMT) Vs. SH. BABLU AND OTHERS[STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND DEHRADUN] 19-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — Educational Institutions — Educational institutions and examination boards do not provide "service" as defined by the Act, and students are not "consumers" in this context. India Law Library Docid # 2400057
(885) SH. YADVINDER SINGH BHATIA AND OTHERS Vs. EMAAR INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EMAAR MGF LAND LTD) AND OTHERS[STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH] 19-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act Jurisdiction Arbitration Clause An arbitration clause in an agreement between a builder and a buyer does not prevent consumer forums from hearing disputes, even after amendments to arbitration laws. India Law Library Docid # 2400053
(886) MANOJ MEHTA (SINCE DECEASED) AND OTHERS Vs. EMAAR INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EMAAR MGF LAND LTD) AND OTHERS[STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH] 19-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 2(1)(d) Consumer Definition Complainant purchasing residential plot for personal use and to move to a less polluted city is a consumer Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 24A Limitation Period Objection regarding non-filing of succession certificate by legal heirs dismissed as they provided a surviving member certificate. Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 2(1)(r) Unfair Trade Practice Developer charging preferential location charges (PLC) for India Law Library Docid # 2400054
(887) STANDARD CHARTERED BANK AND ANOTHER Vs. MANKUMAR KUNDLIYA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Definition of Consumer — Commercial Purpose Exclusion — Loan facility availed by a sole proprietorship for expanding business and earning profits constitutes a commercial purpose, thus excluding the proprietor from the definition of 'consumer' unless the services were exclusively for earning livelihood by self-employment. India Law Library Docid # 2400002
(888) ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE RAJPUR ROAD Vs. DEV CATERERS[STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND, DEHRADUN] 18-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(d) — Explanation — Commercial Purpose — Transactions for commercial purposes do not fall under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, unless they are for earning livelihood by self-employment. A current account used for commercial transactions does not qualify as being for consumer purposes. India Law Library Docid # 2400055
(889) M/S. SILVERTON PULP AND PAPERS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 19 First Appeal Delay Condonation Appeal filed after 4 days delay Delay condoned for stated reasons. India Law Library Docid # 2400052
(890) GAGANJEET BHULLAR Vs. M/S EMIRATES AIRLINES, DELHI AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-09-2023 Consumer Protection — Deficiency in Service — Airline Liability — An airline is liable for lost baggage but the compensation is limited to SDRs 1000 per baggage unless a higher value is declared at the time of booking or check-in. India Law Library Docid # 1882353
(891) M/S. JINDAL POLY FILMS LTD. Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-09-2023 Insurance Act, 1938, Section 64UM — Marine Cargo Policy — Accident during transit — Claim for damage — Dispute over assessment of internal damage — Complainant's refusal to dismantle machinery in India due to warranty and manufacturer's advice — Insurance company's insistence on local inspection — Court held that complainant acted reasonably given warranty and manufacturer's expert opinion, and insurance company's refusal to depute surveyor to Germany constituted deficiency in service. India Law Library Docid # 1882325
(892) JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE AND ANOTHER Vs. SHRADHANJALI MANIYA AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Medical Negligence — Consent — Procedure — Death of patient after procedure for draining pus from tonsil — State Commission found no negligence in treatment but awarded compensation for lack of informed consent — Patient and family members not informed about risks and consent not obtained before procedure — Supreme Court principles on consent for medical treatment require doctor to disclose nature, procedure, purpose, benefits, alternatives, substantial risks, and India Law Library Docid # 1882323
(893) YOGENDER S. BANSAL Vs. M/S BPTP LTD. [CHANDIGARH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 2(7) — Definition of Consumer — Speculative Investor Defence — Mere purchase of more than one property does not automatically make a buyer a speculative investor. The onus is on the seller to prove commercial intent with cogent evidence. Purchased property for personal use and family needs is a valid ground for being considered a consumer. India Law Library Docid # 1882237
(894) ANSHUL AGARWAL Vs. SHREENIWAS COTTON MILLS LIMITED [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986; Section 2(1)(d) Consumer; Section 2(1)(g) Deficiency in Service; Section 2(1)(r) Unfair Trade Practice Allegation that more than one residential unit booked amounts to commercial purpose Onus on opposite party to prove commercial purpose through evidence Bald averment insufficient Taking bank loan and servicing it does not automatically imply commercial purpose. India Law Library Docid # 1882355
(895) VEENA BAJAJ AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. NEXGEN INFRACON PRIVATE LIMITED (A MAHAGUN GROUP COMPANY) [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(1)(a) — Deficiency in service and Unfair Trade Practice — Delay in possession — Project promotion and execution — Complainants booked apartments, paid substantial amounts, but faced delayed possession and various other issues including increased area, revised layout plans, and unfulfilled amenities allegations. Opposite party cited force majeure events as reasons for delay. India Law Library Docid # 1882361
(896) M/S. HARSH CONSTRUCTIONS AND ANOTHER Vs. CONSUMER WELFARE ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-09-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in service — Delay in possession — Promoter's claim of construction delay due to PILs and litigation found to be misleading and unacceptable as no stay was granted and the relevant PIL was disposed of before the agreed possession date. India Law Library Docid # 1882354
(897) VIRENDER SHARMA AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. HAAMID REAL ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Deficiency in Service — Unfair Trade Practice — Developer's failure to execute Flat Buyer Agreement (FBA) after receiving substantial payments, along with delayed possession, constitutes deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. India Law Library Docid # 1882122
(898) AJAY KUMAR GUPTA Vs. PRATEEK INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PVT. LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(a)(i) read with Section 12(1)(a) — Deficiency in handing over possession of flat within promised time — Refund of amount deposited with interest — Complainant booked a flat and paid 95% of the consideration. The agreement stipulated December 2016 possession, later revised to June 2017 with a grace period. Occupancy Certificate was issued late, and construction facilities were incomplete. Buyer sought possession, compensation for delay, and other ameniti India Law Library Docid # 1882250
(899) ALOK KUMAR AND ANOTHER Vs. VATIKA LIMITED [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-08-2023 The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Consumer complaint filed for non-handover of possession within promised time and seeking refund with interest and compensation. Complainant paid a booking amount for a flat and was allotted a specific unit. The builder-buyer agreement was signed despite being one-sided. Possession was promised within 48 months, but the project faced delays. Complainants sought refund, damages, and compensation for mental agony and financial loss due to the opposit India Law Library Docid # 1882255
(900) ARTI Vs. DR. GAGANDEEP GOYAL AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 31-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Revision Petition — Medical Negligence — Wrong diagnosis, operation, complications, financial loss — Reversal of State Commission's order by Supreme Court. India Law Library Docid # 1882274