(921) M/S. SHRIRAM CHITS (MAHARASHTRA) LTD. Vs. SHEFALI [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revisional Jurisdiction — National Commission's power to interfere with concurrent findings of lower forums is limited. It can only intervene if the State Commission has acted beyond its jurisdiction, failed to exercise jurisdiction, or acted illegally or with material irregularity. India Law Library Docid # 1882284
(922) JASIBEN GOVINDBHAI MAKWANA Vs. AVIVA LIFE INSURANCE CO. INDIA LTD. [GUJARAT STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Sections 2(1)(c), 2(1)(d), 2(1)(g), 2(1)(r), 12, 14 Deficiency in Service Insurance Claim Repudiation Non-disclosure of Material Facts Life Insurance Policy Contract of Utmost Good Faith Materiality of Facts Fraudulent Intent Sections 45 of the Insurance Act, 1938 Dishonest Intent Evidence Burden of Proof. India Law Library Docid # 1882301
(923) MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA FARM DIVISION Vs. SUMIT KUMAR AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revisionary powers of National Commission — Scope is limited to jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or illegal or materially irregular exercise of jurisdiction — National Commission should not interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower Fora unless such findings are perverse or based on no evidence. India Law Library Docid # 1882329
(924) BAJAJ ALLIANZ LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. MACHERLA KISHORE KUMAR [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 2(1)(g), 13(4) — Deficiency in Service — Repudiation of Insurance Claim — Admissibility of Documentary Evidence — Consumer forums are not bound by strict rules of Evidence Act and can rely on unauthenticated documents, but credibility must be assessed — Failure to formally prove crucial documents like investigator's report and hospital records through examination of witnesses led to repudiation being unsubstantiated. India Law Library Docid # 1882280
(925) SATISH ESTATES PVT. LTD. Vs. GULSHAN RAI [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-08-2023 Consumer Protection — Deficiency in service — Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(g) — Developer's obligation to deliver possession or refund deposit with interest — Developer's failure to deliver possession of a plot within a reasonable time as per agreement, despite buyer making substantial payment — Developer's claim of forfeiture of deposit due to buyer's default in payment is questionable without proper demand notice — State Commission's order directing possession or refund with in India Law Library Docid # 1882283
(926) STATE BANK OF BIKANER AND JAIPUR Vs. VIPIN KUMAR AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Revision Petition — Scope of — Limited — Powers only to be exercised if there is prima facie jurisdictional error in impugned order — State Commission's order upheld as no infirmity, material irregularity or jurisdictional error found. India Law Library Docid # 1882285
(927) CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD Vs. KARNIAL SINGH [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 2(1)(g), 2(1)(r) — Deficiency in service and Unfair trade practice — Default in payment by allottee — Obligation of housing authority to allot or refund promptly — Non-cancellation of allotment despite default and continued issuance of show-cause notices — Allottee's plea that multiplying interest made payment impossible — Held, the housing authority's inaction in cancelling the allotment when it was a duty to do so amounts to deficiency in service. India Law Library Docid # 1882303
(928) M/S. BPTP LTD. Vs. AROOP KUMAR SINGH AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Failure to refund amount with agreed interest. Complainant booked a flat and paid a significant amount. Developer failed to start construction within the promised timeframe. Developer promised refund with 9% interest via email. Developer later refunded an amount with a deduction without explanation. Flat buyer's agreement did not allow for such deductions. Developer's actions constituted deficiency in service. India Law Library Docid # 1882308
(929) MR. ANAND KUMAR Vs. TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. [DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-08-2023 No fault or imperfection in quality or manner of performance of service in relation to housing construction can be termed as deficiency in service. Failure of a developer to comply with contractual obligations to provide a flat to a purchaser within the stipulated period amounts to deficiency in service. India Law Library Docid # 1882123
(930) SURESH CHANDRA GUPTA Vs. HDFC BANK LTD. AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Demat Account Mishandling — A complainant's shares were mistakenly dematerialized into another person's account due to an error in form filling, and the bank was found to have deficiencies in service. India Law Library Docid # 1882272
(931) ASHOK AUTO SALES LIMITED AGRA KANPUR ROAD NOONIHAI AGRA UTTAR PRADESH Vs. SUBHASHIS JAIN AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 2(1)(d), 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 21, 25 — Manufacturer's liability for manufacturing defects — No evidence from dealer to prove use of adulterated diesel or improper driving by complainant — Findings of District Forum that vehicle suffered from inherent defects upheld — Dealer's plea of principal to principal relationship not raised in defence — Dismissal of dealer's revision. India Law Library Docid # 1882278
(932) SUBHASH KUMAR Vs. VIPIN KUMAR AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 58(1) — Jurisdiction — Complaint filed for harassment and deficiency in service in cancellation of residential units and refund of payment — Opposite parties resist complaint on grounds of limitation, commercial purpose, lack of evidence, forum shopping, nature of contract (sale vs. service), and impermissibility of interest relief — Preliminary objections considered. India Law Library Docid # 1882286
(933) MANAGER, INDUSIND BANK LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs. SANJAY GHOSH [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revisionary powers of National Commission — Limited scope — Can only be exercised if there is a prima facie jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or illegal exercise of jurisdiction with material irregularity. India Law Library Docid # 1882330
(934) SATYA BRAT JAISWAL Vs. VEDIC CONCLAVE PRIVATE LIMITED [WEST BENGAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 69 — Limitation for filing complaint — Complaint must be filed within two years from the date the cause of action arose — This provision is mandatory — Delay can be condoned only if sufficient cause is shown and reasons are recorded in writing by the Commission — Failure to file within the period or seek condonation constitutes a bar. India Law Library Docid # 1882235
(935) AFTAB ISLAM Vs. GOFRAIN MOLLA AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-08-2023 CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Complaint — locus standi — Investors who deposited money in schemes floated by investment company — Deposits not repaid with interest after default — Directed payment of principal and interest with compensation by forums below — Revision by alleged commission agent dismissed. India Law Library Docid # 1882246
(936) BALUSINH SOMSINH NARVE Vs. SATNAM AGRO CENTRE AND OTHER [GUJARAT STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Defective Goods — Burden of Proof — Complainant failed to prove that the seed bags purchased lacked mandatory information, undermining his claim of sub-standard material. India Law Library Docid # 1882276
(937) RASANDIK ELECTRIC VEHICLES PVT. LTD. Vs. AYODHYA PRASAD MISHRA AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-08-2023 Consumer Protection — Deficiency in Service — Vehicle Purchase — District Forum awarded compensation to complainant for defective vehicle based on expert report confirming manufacturing defect, with State Commission concurring. India Law Library Docid # 1882281
(938) M.S. BAKANKAR Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Revision Petition — Jurisdiction — Court can entertain a revision petition against an order of the State Commission. India Law Library Docid # 1882306
(939) BHARTI AXA LIFE INSURANCE LTD. Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Revisional Jurisdiction — Scope — Commission's revisional powers are limited to instances of prima facie jurisdictional error, perversity, or material irregularity in lower fora's findings — Can only interfere with concurrent findings of fact if they are perverse, based on inadmissible evidence, conjecture, or omission of material evidence — Cannot re-assess or re-appreciate evidence when findings are concurrent and based on evidence on record. India Law Library Docid # 1882307
(940) TEJAS GOPALJI SOMANI Vs. TATA MOTORS LTD. AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-08-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Manufacturing Defect — Appeal against State Commission Order — Complainant refused to take delivery of vehicle after repairs, attributing defects to manufacturing — No expert evidence produced by complainant to prove manufacturing defect — Defects alleged were mechanical and rectified — Refusal to take delivery without tangible reason not justifiable — No deficiency in service by opposite parties. India Law Library Docid # 1882112