National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) NCDRC Holds New Delhi Institute Of Management Studies Liable For Misleading Student For Joining MBA Course The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench of Dr Inder Jit Singh (Presiding Member) held New Delhi Institute of Management Studies liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for misleading...
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC)
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench of Dr Inder Jit Singh (Presiding Member) held New Delhi Institute of Management Studies liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for misleading a student into joining its MBA course with the false assurance that the course was being offered in association with Madhuraj Kamraj University.
Case Title: New Delhi Institute of Management Studies vs Shamaneshwaram and 2 Ors.
Case No.: Revision Petition No. 346-347 of 2019
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Insured Is Bound By Information Provided In Proposal Form: NCDRC
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Justice Sudip Ahluwalia, held that allowed a revision petition by Life Insurance Corporation and held that an insured has to mandatorily adhere to the information provided in the proposal form during the application process.
Case Title: Life Insurance Corporation Of India Vs. Reena Agarwal
Case Number: R.P. No. 849/2020
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
National Commission's Revisional Powers Limited To Jurisdictional Error Or Irregularity: NCDRC
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by AVM J. Rajendra, held that National Commission's powers are limited to addressing issues of jurisdictional error or irregularity and cannot overturn concurrent factual findings made by the District Forum and the State Commission.
Case Title: Rajesh Singh Vs. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Case Number: R.P No. 887/2019
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Forfeiture Must Be Reasonable Requiring Actual Proof Of Damage: NCDRC
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Justice Ram Surat Maurya and Bharatkumar Pandya, held that forfeiture of earnest money must be reasonable and not penal, requiring proof of actual damage.
Case Title: Dhruv Upadhyaya Vs. M/S Capital Heights Pvt Ltd.
Case Number: C.C. No. 963/2017
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
National Commission Cannot Interfere With Concurrent Factual Findings Made By Lower Fora: NCDRC
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by AVM J. Rajendra, held that the revision jurisdiction of the National Commission is limited in nature and it cannot interfere with the findings of the lower fora without proper evidence.
Case Title: Shashikala Baranwal Vs. Union Of India & Anr.
Case Number: R.P. No. 783/2023
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
MD In Medicine Qualified To Treat ICU Patients Without Additional Intensive Care Training: NCDRC
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Justice Ram Surat Maurya and Mr. Bharatkumar Pandya, dismissed an appeal against Akshaya Hospital and held that doctors with an MD in medicine are sufficiently qualified to treat ICU patients without needing extra intensive care training.
Case Title: V.C. Rawat Vs. Akshaya Hospital
Case Number: F.A. No. 587/2023
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) bench of Subhash Chandra (Presiding Member) held Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd. liable for failure to deliver the possession of the flat within the stipulated time, despite receiving regular part-payments for the same.
Case Title: S.K. Rathore vs Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd. and Anr. (and connected matters)
Case No.: First Appeal No. 44 of 2018
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
NCDRC Holds K. Soni Builders Liable For Failure To Deliver Possession Of Flat Within Stipulated Time
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) bench of Mr Subhash Chandra (Presiding Member) held K. Soni Builders liable for failure to handle the possession of the flat within the stipulated time to the Complainants. It was held that a flat buyer cannot be expected to wait indefinitely for possession and is justified in terminating the agreement if possession is significantly delayed.
Case Title: Shashi Bansal and Anr. vs K Soni Builders
Case No.: First Appeal No. 1371 of 2018
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) bench of AVM J. Rajendra (Presiding Member) dismissed an appeal against New India Assurance Company Ltd. It was held that the claim stood settled in light of the surveyor's report, which rightfully calculated the loss. Due consideration was given to the surveyor's report and the challenge against it was rejected based on lack of ignorance of material evidence and misrepresentation of facts.
Case Title: M/s Bhupinder Tyres Works vs New India Assurance Company Ltd.
Case No.: First Appeal No. 1275 of 2014
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising Binoy Kumar (Presiding Member) allowed a revision petition filed by National Insurance Co. Ltd., noting that the policyholder failed to disclose the theft of the concerned vehicle within the permissible time range to the local police. It was held that while delays in notifying the insurance company can be excused, filing the FIR must be immediate.
Case Title: National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Md. Sallauddin
Case No.: Revision Petition No. 803 of 2020
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC)
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) bench of Justice A.P. Sahi (President) held DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd. liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for failure to execute the plot-buyer's agreement and subsequently, cancelling the booking after charging excessive forfeiture amount.
Case Title: Kuldeep Singh and Anr. vs DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.
Case No.: C.C. No. 1937 of 2017
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Madhya Pradesh
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Madhya Pradesh bench of Shri A.K. Tiwari (Acting President) and Dr Srikant Pandey (Member) dismissed an appeal against LIC based on the fact that the deceased insured had suppressed material facts regarding her health and had declared herself 'healthy' even though she was receiving treatment at a hospital.
Case Title: Hariram Singh Kushwaha vs Life Insurance Corporation of India
Case No.: First Appeal No. 1442 of 2019
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Madhya Pradesh
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Madhya Pradesh bench of Shri A.K. Tiwari (Acting President) and Dr. Shrikant Pandey (Member) held that a surveyor's report in insurance claims holds significant evidentiary value and cannot be disregarded without valid reasons. Subsequently, the bench dismissed an appeal against Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company, as it had already paid the amount determined by the surveyor.
Case Title: Alok Khandelwal vs Branch Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company and Others
Case No.: First Appeal No. 1303 of 2017
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana bench of Justice T.P.S. Mann (President), Mr S.P. Sood (Member) and Mrs Manjula (Member) held ADAMA India Pvt. Ltd., a pesticide manufacturer, and its Seller liable for delivering defective pesticides which led to approximately 70%-80% damage to the Complainant's crops.
Case Title: ADAMA India Pvt. Vs Jitender and Anr.
Case No.: First Appeal No. 1267 of 2018
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttarakhand
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttarakhand bench of Ms Kumkum Rani (President) and Mr B.S. Manral (Member) held National Insurance Company Limited liable for wrongful repudiation of a valid accidental claim based on exceeding seating capacity of 6 against the permissible limit of 5 passengers in the vehicle. It was held that there were two minors inside the vehicle at the time of the accident, who were considered as 'one unit'. Therefore, there was no violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.
Case Title: National Insurance Company Ltd. and Anr. vs Kanchan Paliyal and Anr.
Case No.: 19.07.2024
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Madhya Pradesh
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Madhya Pradesh bench of Shri A.K. Tiwari (Acting President) and Dr Srikant Pandey (Member) held that acts of unauthorized use of electricity and offences under Sections 126 and 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 do not fall within the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Case Title: M.P. Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitran and Anr. vs Smt. Renu Sikarwar
Case No.: First Appeal No. 1643 of 2023
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi bench of Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal (President) and Pinki (Judicial Member) has held that consumer forums lack jurisdiction over complaints involving allegations of fraud and forgery as these disputes cannot be resolved summarily.
Case Title: Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. vs Mrs. Pramila Bhatia and Anr.
Case No.: FA No. 692/2023
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana bench of Mr Justice TPS Mann (President), Mr S.P. Sood (Judicial Member) and Mrs Manjula(Member) held Amit Auto Works, Jind District liable for failure to provide satisfactory modification services for the Complainant's auto. Amit Auto Works also excessively charged the Complainant and retained the auto's original steel sheet.
Case Title: Amit Auto Works vs Mewa Singh
Case No.: First Appeal No. 1429 of 2023
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh
Failure To Refund, Arrange Alternate Flight, Chandigarh District Commission Holds Air India Liable
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh bench of Shri Amrinder Singh Sindhu (President) and Shri B.M. Sharma (Member) held Air India liable for its failure to provide an alternate flight or refund the ticket price for a flight which was cancelled due to 'technical reasons'.
Case Title: Amarinder Singh vs Air India Limited and Ors.
Case No.: C.C. No. 13/2020
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh bench of Shri Pawanjit Singh (President) and Shri Suresh Kumar Sardana (Member) held IRCTC and Indian Railways liable for notifying a last-minute change that the train would not stop at the Complainants' designated stop. Further, the authorities failed to refund the ticket price to the Complainants.
Case Title: Bhartendu Sood and Anr. vs Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation and Anr.
Case No.: C.C. No. 148 of 2023
Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Bangalore Urban (Karnataka)
The Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Bangalore Urban (Karnataka) bench of Vijaykumar M. Pawale (President), V. Anuradha (Member) and Kum. Renukadevi Deshpande (Member) held Titan liable for deficiency in service for selling a defective smartwatch and not responding to the Complainant's complaints.
Case Title: Mr Nagateja P. vs The Authorised Signatory, World of Titan
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ernakulam
Ernakulam Consumer Commission Orders Rs 17.83 Lakhs As Compensation To Malayalam Film Actor
The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ernakulam recently ordered compensation of Rs 17,83,641 to Malayalam film actor Harishree Ashokan due to the supply and installation of defective tiles at his residence, 'Punjabi House'. The Bench comprising President D B Binu and Members Ramachandran V and Sreevidhia T N found that Peekya Tiles Centre (distributor), Kerala AGL World (manufacturer) was liable for deficiency of service, unfair trade practices for supplying defective tiles. The Commission also found N S Marble Works liable for deficiency of service for fitting tiles with poor craftsmanship.
Case title: P K Ashokan v Peekay Tiles Centre
Case number: C. C. No. 209/2018
Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Bangalore (Karnataka)
The Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Bangalore (Karnataka) bench of Sharavathi S.M.(President) and Jyothi N (Member) held Amazon liable for deficiency in services due to its failure to refund the amount despite receiving the returned items.
Case Title: Deepthi Bhavanam vs Amazon
Case No.: CC No. 352/2023
Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Bangalore Urban (Karnataka)
The Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Bangalore Urban (Karnataka) bench of Vijaykumar M Pawale (President), V Anuradha (Member) and Renukadevi Deshpande (Member) held Cashify liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for selling a defective mobile phone and failing to either replace it or refund the amount despite the phone being under warranty.
Case Title: Mr Deepak P vs M/s. Cashify
Case No.: CC/343/2023
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kullu (Himachal Pradesh)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kullu (Himachal Pradesh) bench of Mr Purender Vaidya (President) and Ms Manchali (Member) held that an FIR filed by an uninvolved third party cannot be used by the Insurance Company to dispute the insured's version of facts regarding the accident. As a result, National India Assurance Company was held liable for wrongful repudiation of a genuine accidental claim.
Case Title: Chhering Dolma vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Case No.: Complaint No. 14/2022
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam (Kerala)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam (Kerala) bench of Shri D.B. Binu (President), Shri V. Ramachandran (Member) and Smt. Sreevidhia T.N. held Sony and its authorized Service Agent liable for restrictive trade practice and deficiency in service for failure to provide repair services on account of unavailability of spare parts for the TV purchased by the Complainant. The Complainant was instead offered to buy a new product at a special price.
Case Title: Abdul Razzak vs Sony India and Anr.
Case No.: C.C. No. 461/2019
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana bench of Shri Sanjeev Batra (President) and Ms Monika Bhagat (Member) held 'Behrouz Biryani' and Swiggy liable for delivering chicken biryani instead of veg biryani. They further failed to properly address the Complainant's grievances, which constituted a violation under the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020.
Case Title: Vasu Gupta vs Behrouz Biryani and Anr.
Case No.: Complaint No. 105 dated 17.03.2022
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam (Kerala)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam (Kerala) bench of Shri D.B. Binu (President), Shri V Ramachandran (Member) and Smt. Sreevidhia T.N. (Member) held Honda Motorcycle & Scooter India Pvt. Ltd. and its authorized seller liable for failure to rectify recurring issues with a newly bought Active scooter.
Case Title: Nidhi Jain vs Honda Motorcycle and Scooter India Pvt. Ltd.
Case No.: Complaint Case No. CC/22/50
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II U.T. Chandigarh
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II U.T. Chandigarh bench of Shri Amrinder Singh Sindhu (President) and Shri B.M. Sharma (Member) held HDFC Bank and Phoenix ARC Private Limited liable for illegally demanding outstanding amount from the Complainant w.r.t. to two credit cards wrongfully issued under her name, which she never actually used.
Case Title: Paramjit Kaur Pasricha vs HDFC Bank Ltd and Anr.
Case No.: CC No. 539/2023
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, East Godavari (Andhra Pradesh)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, East Godavari (Andhra Pradesh) bench of Sri D. Kodanda Rama Murthy (President), Sri S. Suresh Kumar (Member) and Smt. KS.N.. Lakshmi (Member) held Aditya Birla Health Insurance Company Ltd. liable for wrongful repudiation of a valid health insurance claim based on pre-existing diseases. The bench noted that the Complainant disclosed all material pre-existing conditions and even paid an extra premium for it.
Case Title: Alluri Venkata Rama Raju vs Aditya Birla Capital and Anr.
Case No.: CC No. 67/2023