(981) MOHAMMAD YUSUF RAZA Vs. INDORE TRANSPORT AGENCY [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Scope — Concurrent findings of fact by lower fora — Interference not warranted unless grave error, jurisdictional error, or legal principle ignored. India Law Library Docid # 1882215
(982) BABY SAMHITHA K.S AND OTHERS Vs. CLOUD NINE AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Medical Negligence — Standard of Care — Hospital's Duty — Failure to conduct necessary investigations for pre-eclampsia before caesarean section, premature discharge of patient, and misdiagnosis of breathlessness as asthma by doctors constitute medical negligence. Hospital is vicariously liable for the negligence of its doctors. India Law Library Docid # 1882365
(983) NEW INDIA ASS. CO. LTD. Vs. AJITBHAI R. PATEL [GUJARAT STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-06-2023 Insurance Law — Contract of Insurance — Utmost Good Faith — Duty of Disclosure — Insured has a duty to disclose material information regarding pre-existing conditions when enhancing sum insured, failing which insurer can repudiate enhanced coverage. India Law Library Docid # 1881902
(984) AMARJIT KAUR W/O. SHRI JOGINDER SINGH Vs. KOTAK MAHINDRA OLD MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE LTD. & ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Insurance Policy — Deficiency in Service — Unfair Trade Practices — An illiterate complainant was assured by an insurance agent that her investment would double in ten years and could be withdrawn after three years. She paid a premium of Rs. 4,60,000. Upon seeking withdrawal after three years, the insurer refused to pay. The District Forum ordered a refund with interest and compensation. The State Commission set aside the Distri India Law Library Docid # 1882186
(985) SUNCITY PROJECT PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. LT. COLONET BRIJESH KUMAR SINGH [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 47 — Pecuniary Jurisdiction of State Commission — Determination of — Based on consideration paid, not aggregate of value of goods/services and compensation claimed — The Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as amended, clearly states that pecuniary jurisdiction is determined by the value of goods or services paid as consideration, and not by the aggregate of the value of goods or services and the compensation claimed. India Law Library Docid # 1882240
(986) PANKAJ MAHESHWARI Vs. S.B.I. GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-06-2023 Consumer Protection — Delay in filing appeal — Supreme Court waiver of limitation in Suo Motu Writ Petition No.3 of 2020 — Delay in filing appeal condoned based on waiver. India Law Library Docid # 1882295
(987) LALIT KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. M/S. E-HOMES INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 35(1)(c) — Representative Complaint — Sameness of Interest — A complaint filed under Section 35(1)(c) requires sameness of interest among numerous consumers, meaning commonality of grievances and seeking identical relief — The burden to prove sameness of interest lies with the complainants, who must provide specific averments to support their claim — Vague allegations or a mix of distinct grievances among complainants will not satisfy this requirement. India Law Library Docid # 1882229
(988) DR. SHAILENDER DHAWAN Vs. DIGVIJAY ADVOCATE AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-06-2023 Medical Negligence Consumer Protection Practitioner's Qualifications An Ayurvedic practitioner is not authorized to practice modern allopathic medicine unless they are also registered under the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. India Law Library Docid # 1882238
(989) GTFS MULTI SERVICES LTD. Vs. SMT. PRAVATI BEHERA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 14-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Jurisdiction — National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can interfere with orders of State Commission if it finds such order to be erroneous or unjust. India Law Library Docid # 2415661
(990) CDR. RAJESH RAJGOPALAN AND OTHERS Vs. M/S. VATIKA LTD. [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Complaint filed for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice — Delay in handing over possession of flats — Flat Buyers Agreement (FBA) and subsequent revisions by builder — Non-obtaining of Occupation Certificate (OC) and No Objection Certificate (NOC) — Held, deficiencies in service. India Law Library Docid # 1882234
(991) M/S. SOUTH BENGAL AGRO PRODUCTS Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-06-2023 User Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Definition of Consumer — Commercial entity can be a consumer if goods/services not linked to profit generation — Insurance contract is a contract of indemnity — Insurance for business is not a commercial purpose under the Act. India Law Library Docid # 1882239
(992) PALANADU COLD STORAGE Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — Commercial Purpose — Insurance Policy — Contract of Indemnity — A contract of insurance is a contract of indemnity, and therefore, there is no question of commercial purpose in obtaining insurance coverage. A cold storage owner storing farmers' produce is considered a 'Consumer' for insurance purposes, even if the stock belongs to farmers. India Law Library Docid # 1882294
(993) PUSHPA VERMA & 2 OTHERS Vs. BHARDWAJ NURSING AND MATERNITY HOME PRIVATE LIMITED & 9 OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Medical Negligence Standard of Care Doctor not liable for errors in judgment or unavoidable adverse outcomes provided they act with due care and skill. India Law Library Docid # 1882054
(994) JATIN JAIN Vs. ADANI M2K PROJECTS LLP & ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Delay in Possession — Developer agreed to complete construction within 48 months from agreement date with a six-month grace period, making the due date for possession April 25, 2018 — Developer completed construction on July 20, 2017, but possession was offered on February 16, 2019, after obtaining an occupation certificate on February 12, 2019 — Court ruled that possession was offered with reasonable delay and not a deficiency in service, India Law Library Docid # 1882182
(995) AMBILY MENON & ANOTHER Vs. M/S. BPTP LTD. & 3 OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Deficiency in Service — Delay in Possession — Developer agreed to deliver possession of a flat within 36 months from the execution of the agreement, with a grace period of 180 days — Developer failed to deliver possession within the stipulated period and also failed to obtain an occupancy certificate — This constitutes a deficiency in service as home buyers cannot be made to wait for possession indefinitely. India Law Library Docid # 1882187
(996) SHEEL DEV YADAV Vs. M/S. BPTP LTD. AND ANOTHER [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Real Estate — Delay in Possession — Project Delayed — Developer offered possession after obtaining Occupation Certificate — Buyer obligated to take possession as per agreement — Previous Commission judgment citing different possession period disregarded due to overlooking contractual clause for grace period and buyer's obligations — Buyer's claim for refund with exaggerated interest rejected. India Law Library Docid # 1882201
(997) UMIYA HABITAT CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED Vs. M/S. UMIYA BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 12, 21 — Deficiency in Service — Constructional Defects — Home buyers formed a co-operative society and filed a complaint alleging various constructional defects and deficiencies in service by the developer. — Developer obtained completion and occupation certificates from statutory authorities. — Home buyers did not raise objections at the time of taking possession. — Report from an independent engineer was filed, but the engineer's affidavit was not submi India Law Library Docid # 1882242
(998) ANIL MILKHIRAM GOYEL AND ANOTHER Vs. HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LIMITED (HSBC) [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in service — Bank's actions regarding KYC updates, account freeze, and CIBIL status — Complainants' joint savings account frozen due to alleged non-compliance with KYC norms, despite evidence of prior updates — Dishonor of cheques despite sufficient funds — Reopening of previously settled loan accounts — Bank's inconsistent stand and failure to provide crucial documents — Held, bank's actions unjustified, negligent, and amounted to deficiency in service India Law Library Docid # 1603341
(999) LIBERTY VIDEOCON GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. UMA BAI DHANKAR AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Group Personal Accident Policy — Accidental Death — Insurer's repudiation of claim — Burden of proof — Exclusion clause interpretation — Policy terms ambiguity. India Law Library Docid # 2415669
(1000) AAKUP KHAN S/O SHRI AJMAT KHAN Vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & 2 OTHERS [NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-06-2023 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in service — Insurance claim — Vehicle accident — District Forum awarded compensation based on Complainant's submission about surveyor's assessment. State Commission reduced award based on surveyor's report filed at final argument stage. Court upheld State Commission's order, noting surveyor's report requires due weight and Complainant failed to provide contrary evidence. India Law Library Docid # 1882180