(961) SMT. DROPATI DEVI Vs. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE LTD.[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-11-2023 Insurance Law — Motor Vehicle Insurance — Motor theft claim — Complainant's vehicle stolen and later recovered in damaged condition — Insurance company denied claim due to lack of cooperation and evidence regarding vehicle's condition at recovery — District Commission dismissed complaint but granted liberty to file fresh complaint after insurer adjudicates claim. India Law Library Docid # 2400984
(962) KOTHOTTIL PHARMACEUTICAL DISTRIBUTORS AND OTHERS Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD AND OTHERS[KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 22-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 12 — Complaint for compensation for losses due to fire — Insurance claim repudiated — Allegation of deficiency in service by insurer. India Law Library Docid # 2400989
(963) MR. NEERAJ GAUBA AND ANOTHER Vs. BESTECH INDIA PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(d) — Definition of 'consumer' — Commercial purpose — Onus of proof — A person is considered a consumer if they buy goods for consideration, not for resale or commercial purpose — The onus is on the opposite party to provide documentary evidence that a unit was purchased for commercial purposes to exclude the buyer from the definition of 'consumer' — A mere allegation of commercial purpose is insufficient. India Law Library Docid # 2400964
(964) MR. STEPHEN ROGER AFONSO Vs. SHRI. CHANDRAS PEDNEKAR[GOA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(d)(i) — Consumer — Definition of — Commercial purpose — Appellant purchased a photocopying machine for his business shop, which was a "small shop" but aimed at earning profit — Held, the primary purpose of purchasing the machine was for commercial activity with profit motive, thus the appellant did not fall under the definition of a "consumer" as per Section 2(d)(i) of the Act. India Law Library Docid # 2400969
(965) SHRI KRISHAN COLD STORAGE Vs. DEEP SINGH[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Definition of Consumer — Argument that storing potatoes for livelihood did not constitute consumer status — Rejection of argument as petitioner failed to establish potatoes were not for livelihood and provided no evidence to support this claim. India Law Library Docid # 2400958
(966) MANAGER, HDFC EGRO GENRAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. BHARAT LAL MOGRE[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revisional Jurisdiction — Scope — National Commission can interfere with concurrent findings of fact only if they are perverse or fora below acted without jurisdiction — Re-assessment or re-appreciation of evidence is not permissible in revisional jurisdiction. India Law Library Docid # 2400959
(967) M/S INTERNATIONAL TRACTORS LTD. Vs. VIJAY KUMAR S/O SH. BANKU RAM AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Deficiency in Service Unfair Trade Practice Dealer fails to provide retail invoice and insurance documents for a tractor sold to a complainant. India Law Library Docid # 2400980
(968) PAWAN KUMAR Vs. THE SENIOR MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. MEHATPUR[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 — Rule 9(3) — Driving Licence — Endorsement for carrying hazardous goods — Insurance Claim — Repudiation — Vehicle owner's claim for damaged vehicle was repudiated by insurance company on grounds that the driver's licence did not have the mandatory endorsement to carry hazardous goods, as per Rule 9(3) of the Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 — Vehicle was carrying empty hydrogen gas cylinders at the time of accident — Rule 9(3) mandates endorseme India Law Library Docid # 2400981
(969) NARESH VERMA Vs. SINGH BROTHERS (SHOE PALACE)[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Complaint for defective shoes — Complainant purchased shoes for Rs. 3,400/-, which got spoiled within 2-3 months, despite a warranty of six months — Complainant approached the seller for exchange but was unsuccessful, leading to a complaint alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. India Law Library Docid # 2400982
(970) UBER INDIA SYSTEMS PVT. LTD. Vs. REEMA JEETSINGH CHAWLA[MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 38(2) — Filing of Written Version — Limitation Period — Mandatory 45-day period for filing written version is strictly applicable — No discretion for extension by District or State Consumer Commissions — Supreme Court judgment in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V/s Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. is binding. India Law Library Docid # 2400992
(971) DUA HOSPITAL & MATERNITY HOME, AZAD CHOWK AND OTHERS Vs. JATINDER KAUR W/O MANDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS[PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Deficiency in Service Medical Negligence Unfair Trade Practice Allegation of medical negligence and unfair trade practice against a hospital and doctor for alleged improper medical services during childbirth, including unnecessary caesarean operation and inadequate post-operative care. India Law Library Docid # 2400993
(972) INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. MOHAN KATARA SON OF SH. SHAM LAL AND OTHERS[PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Unfair Trade Practice — Gas Subsidy Not Credited — Appellant (Indian Oil Corporation) challenged Consumer Commission's order directing credit of subsidy and compensation. Complainant had booked cylinders and subsidy was not credited. Commission partly allowed the complaint. Appellant argued complainant had availed maximum subsidized cylinders for the financial year as per government policy and thus was not entitled to further subsidy. The a India Law Library Docid # 2400994
(973) CHARANJIT SINGH S/O SR. SURJIT SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. C & C TOWERS LTD., AND OTHERS[PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 17 Consumer Complaint Maintainability Two complaints filed against same opposite parties (OPs) involving common questions of law and facts, consolidated for disposal. India Law Library Docid # 2400995
(974) SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. SMT. RACHNA KUMARI W/O LATE SH. KULDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Driving Licence — Validity for Transport Vehicles — A person holding a valid licence to drive a Light Motor Vehicle (Non-Transport) can also drive a Light Motor Vehicle (Transport/Light Commercial Vehicle/Goods Vehicle). India Law Library Docid # 2400983
(975) MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS Vs. VYSYAN HAMZA PROPRIETOR SAHIRA FURNITURE AND INDUSTRIES MAIN ROAD KAMBALAKKAD POST KANIYAMBETTA[KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Definition of Consumer Revenue Recovery proceedings Defaulter in loan repayment challenging recovery charges Cannot be considered a consumer District Forum erred in entertaining complaint. India Law Library Docid # 2400990
(976) THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. M/S ORIENT RESINS LTD.[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 2(1)(g) and 2(1)(o) Deficiency in Service Insurance claim repudiated due to disputed road existence after theft of vehicle District Commission found deficiency in service and awarded claim amount and compensation. India Law Library Docid # 2400963
(977) AJIT SINGH Vs. M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Revision Petition Delay in filing Sufficient cause for condoning delay if free copy of order not received, and application for copy filed promptly. India Law Library Docid # 2400956
(978) PRADEEP & COMPANY Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Revision Petition — Scope of Revisional Jurisdiction — Limited scope — Can only be exercised if there is prima facie jurisdictional error, or if State Commission failed to exercise or exercised jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity. India Law Library Docid # 2400957
(979) NEW INDIAASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. AMIT EARTH MOVERS[HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-11-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Insurance Policy Location of Operation When an insured vehicle, like a hydraulic excavator, is insured by the New India Assurance Company Ltd. and the policy lists a specific operating address, but the vehicle is moved to a different location for work purposes, the insurance cover should extend to the vehicle's new operational area, provided the insured remains the same and the vehicle is within the policy period. The insurer's argument that the policy became voi India Law Library Docid # 2400978
(980) REKHA KUMARI W/O SH. VEERU ALIAS RAUJENDER Vs. SH.TULSI RAM BANSAL, S/O SH. JINDU RAM AND OTHERS[HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-11-2023 Insurance Law — Life Insurance Policy — Premium Payment — Lapse of Policy — Child Insurance Policy — Claim for Deficiency in Service — Burden of Proof — Complainant failed to prove handing over of premium amount to agent. India Law Library Docid # 2400979