ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(981) SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. SH. PIAR CHAND S/O SH. KANAKRU RAM AND OTHERS [HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-04-2023
According to the complainant, he participated in that auction and purchased the vehicle in consideration amount of Rs.2.40 lacs. The vehicle was delivered to the complainant on 20.11.2015. However, the necessary documents of the vehicle were not handed over to the complainant. A consumer complaint No.103/2016 was filed against opposite parties No.1 to 3. The same was compromised by the parties on the ground that opposite parties No.1 to 3 had supplied to the complainant the necessary no objectio
India Law Library Docid # 1882053

(982) CANARA BANK Vs. SAURABH DAGAR [UTTAR PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-04-2023
The opposite party Canara Bank moved an application dated 28. 06. 2022 for setting aside order dated 05. 04. 2022, but the District Consumer Commission not only refused to set aside ex-parte order but also closed the opportunity of filing written-statement on behalf of the opposite party on the ground that since no written-statement has been filed by the opposite party even after 45 days has been passed after the notice for appearance of the opposite party was sent to them. Being aggrieved from
India Law Library Docid # 1882088

(983) M/S. ADOBE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. HARYANA STATE INDUSTRIAL & INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & 2 OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-04-2023
The present Consumer Complaint has been filed under Section 21 read with Section 12(1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the Act) by M/s. Adobe Marketing Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Complainant) against Opposite Parties, Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation and Ors. (hereinafter referred to as the Opposite Party Corporation), seeking either allotment of the alternative plot/plots or refund of the amount paid towards purchase of
India Law Library Docid # 1882155

(984) ARUNAVA BHATTACHARJEE & ANOTHER Vs. CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, BENGAL PEERLESS HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD. & ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-04-2023
Notice was issued to the OPs. Parties filed Written Statement/Reply, Rejoinder, Evidence by way of an Affidavit and Written Arguments/Synopsis etc. as per details given in the Table at Annexure-A. The details of the flats allotted to the Complainants/other relevant details, based on pleadings of the parties and other records of the case are also given in the Table at Annexure- A.
India Law Library Docid # 1882092

(985) M/S MARUTHI HABITAT AND REALTORS INDIA PVT LTD Vs. MANOJ K MATHEW [KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 20-04-2023
This is an appeal filed by the opposite parties 1 to 3 in C.C. No. 348 of 2016 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam (District Commission for short). The District Commission as per the order dated 28.01.2023 directed the appellants and other opposite parties to pay the complainants Rs. 10,50,000/- being the amount received by the opposite parties, to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- costs. The complainants are the respondents 1 & 2 and the other op
India Law Library Docid # 1882218

(986) BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, (BSNL), THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER Vs. AVTAR SINGH SOHAL S/O SH. BHAGWAN SINGH [HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-04-2023
Briefly, the case of the complainant is that complainant is the subscriber of landline telephone installed by the opposite party and his customer ID number is 1017901535. The grievance of the complainant is that since November, 2017 his telephone was not working. In this regard complaints were lodged with opposite party (BSNL) w.e.f. 01.11.2017 to 27.12.2017, but neither the telephone was restored nor any reply was given.
India Law Library Docid # 1881919

(987) JALANDHAR IMPROVEMENT TRUST AND ANOTHER Vs. HARBANS SINGH S/O. SHRI AMAR SINGH AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-04-2023
Appeal Nos. 997 and 1260 of 2017 are cross appeals. Similarly Appeal Nos. 999 and 1267 of 2017 are cross appeals, Appeal Nos. 1474 and 1215 of 2017 are cross appeals, Appeal Nos. 1211 and 1319 of 2017 are also cross appeals except Appeal No. 833 of 2018. The brief facts in each of the Appeals are discussed as under. In cross appeals, common facts are mentioned therein.
India Law Library Docid # 1882101

(988) MAGMA FINCORP LIMITED (FORMERLY MAGMA LEASING LTD.) Vs. NIRMALA CHAUDHARY AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-04-2023
The present Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/Opposite Party No. 1 and 2 in the Complaint (hereinafter to be referred to as the Finance Company) under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (for short the Act) against the Order dated 28.11.2016 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh at Lucknow (for short the State Commission) in First Appeal Nos. 1328 of 2015 and 1617 of 2015. By the Impugned Order, the State Commission while affirm
India Law Library Docid # 1882104

(989) M/S SUMIT CHEMICALS PVT. LTD. Vs. M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-04-2023
The complainant which is a private limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing of various chemicals has filed this complaint under section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act) alleging deficiency in service relating to a claim under Fire Insurance Policy by which the claim was settled for a lower amount than claimed by the opposite party.
India Law Library Docid # 1881900

(990) RANVIR SINGH SINGAL Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR, INDIA BULLS REAL ESTATE CORPORATE AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-04-2023
Notice was issued to the OPs. Parties filed Written Statement/Reply, Rejoinder, Evidence by way of an Affidavit and Written Arguments/Synopsis etc. as per details given in the Table at Annexure-A. The details of the flats allotted to the Complainant(s)/other relevant details, based on pleadings of the parties and other records of the case are also given in the Table at Annexure- A.
India Law Library Docid # 1882062

(991) SUBHASH CHANDER MALIK AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. VATIKA LTD. AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-04-2023
Since the facts and question of law involved and the reliefs prayed for in these complaints are similar/identical and against the same Opposite Parties except for minor variations in the dates, events, amount involved and flat numbers etc., which are summarized in the Table at Annexure-A, these complaints are being disposed off by this common order. However, for the sake of convenience, Consumer Complaint (CC) No. 1041 of 2016 is treated as the lead case and facts enumerated herein under are tak
India Law Library Docid # 1882072

(992) M/S. NIRANI SUGARS LTD. Vs. NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-04-2023
The Complainant is a Public Limited Company engaged in the business of manufacturing of sugar at its unit located at Mudhol Taluq, District Balakot, Karnataka. The Complainant had taken Standard Fire and Special Perils Policies covering (i) the stock of baggase/bagas, etc kept in the factory premises (ii) stocks of sugars in godowns/in process/in yards and stocks of spares/packing materials/firewood, etc, and (iii) stocks of molasses kept in the factory/compound. The Policies did not cover spont
India Law Library Docid # 1882161

(993) M/S SHIV UDYOG & ANOTHER Vs. M/S S.B.I. GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-04-2023
This complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the Act) has been filed seeking the enhancement of an insurance claim filed with the opposite party with compensation alleging deficiency in service. The complainant is a proprietorship firm which had obtained a Standard Fire and Special Peril Insurance Policy (in short, the Policy) from the opposite party for Rs 3.10 crores for his premises which was completely damaged in a fire due to an electrical short circuit on 13.02.2013.
India Law Library Docid # 1882164

(994) LOUIS DREYFUS COMPANY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. & 2 OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-04-2023
The Complainant is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of import and export of commodities. Opposite Party No.1 is an Insurance Company with head office at Mumbai. Opposite Parties No.2 & 3 are Regional Office and Divisional Office of Opposite Party No.1 respectively. Complainant obtained Marine Cargo Annual Turnover Policy No.350200/21/09/14/00000369 from Opposite Parties for Annual Sales Turnover Policy Expected Turnover of Rs.1200 Crores (Premium on Half Yearly Basis), valid fro
India Law Library Docid # 1882196

(995) A. JAYALAXMI AND OTHERS Vs. AYUSH HOSPITAL AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-04-2023
The present Complaint has been filed under section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act") by A. Jayalaxmi & 2 Ors. (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Complainants') against Ayush Hospital & Ors. (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Opposite Parties') seeking compensation amounting to Rs. 1,01,00,000/- for medical negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.
India Law Library Docid # 1873334

(996) M/S. CITY VIEW ENTERPRISES Vs. HUDA AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-04-2023
On 07.08.2007, Shri Krishan Lal GPA holder of re-allottee Shri Ranbir Singh Dahiya applied for transfer of the aforesaid plot in the name of Complainant Firm, M/s City View Enterprises (hereinafter referred to as the "Complainant Firm"). On 12.12.2007, re-allotment letter was issued in favour of the Complainant Firm. On 01.04.2008, a new partnership deed was executed inducting a new partner in the firm which was followed by execution of a retirement deed dated 04.06.2008 whereby one of the Partn
India Law Library Docid # 1873350

(997) VIRENDER KUMAR KATARIA Vs. BPTP LTD. & ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-04-2023
The present Review Application Nos. 18 to 32 of 2023 have been filed by the Opposite Party Developer i.e., BPTP Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the Developer) praying for review of the Common Order dated 04.01.2023 passed by this Commission wherein Consumer Complaint Nos. 3023/17, 339/18, 340/18, 1130/18, 1204/18, 1211/18, 1516/18, 697/19, 1492/19, 1598/19, 1671/19, 1885/19, 2018/19, 1225/18, 255/19 and 300/20 were partly allowed by directing the Developer to either hand over the possession wi
India Law Library Docid # 1881906

(998) SMT. REENA BANSAL Vs. DR. MEENAKSHI MISHRA, JHA HOSPITAL AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-04-2023
The Present Complaint had been filed by Reena Bansal (Complainant No. 1) and her husband Manoj Bansal (since deceased) (Complainant No. 2) & her father-in-law Dr. B.R. Bansal (Complainant No. 3) hereinafter referred to as the Complainants against Jha Hospital, Maternity Surgical and Ultrasound Centre (for short Jha Hospital)- Dr. Meenakshi Mishra-D.G.O. (OP No. 1) & Dr. Anupam Singh-Anaesthetist (OP No. 2) hereinafter referred to as the Opposite Parties for alleged medical and deficiency in serv
India Law Library Docid # 1882063

(999) SUKH RAM BISHNOI Vs. HUDA AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-04-2023
The Revision Petition Nos.1066 & 1067 of 2011 were filed by the Applicants/Complainants challenging the Order dated 21.01.2011, passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short the State Commission) in Appeal Nos. 164 & 165 of 2008, whereby the Orders passed the District Forum allowing the Complaints were set aside and Appeals filed by the Opposite Party/Non-Applicant, Haryana Urban Development Authority (for short, the HUDA) were allowed.
India Law Library Docid # 1882076

(1000) M/S. RATNAGIRI GAS & POWER PVT. LTD. Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-04-2023
National Insurance Company Limited (the Insurer) repudiated the insurance claim of M/s. Ratnagiri Gas & Power Pvt. Ltd. (the Insured), vide letter dated 10.03.2010, submitted under Industrial All Risk Policy No.251100/11/08/3400000018, effective from 20.05.2008 to 19.05.2009, for coverage of Rs.2150 crores, for Block-III, of the industrial unit, for the material damage of STG 3X in the incident occurred on 18.06.2008, which was challenged by the Insured in above complaint.
India Law Library Docid # 1882162