National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission National Consumer Commission Holds Oriental Insurance Liable For Deficiency In Service The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Subhash Chandra(member), held that the Custom Bonded Warehouse schemes don't require the insured to own the stocked goods to claim the insurance policy and held Oriental Insurance...
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
National Consumer Commission Holds Oriental Insurance Liable For Deficiency In Service
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Subhash Chandra(member), held that the Custom Bonded Warehouse schemes don't require the insured to own the stocked goods to claim the insurance policy and held Oriental Insurance company liable for service deficiency.
National Consumer Commission Holds RPS Infrastructure Liable For Deficiency In Service
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Subhash Chandra(member), in a complaint against RPS Infrastructure, held that relying on force majeure conditions is unacceptable unless they are adequately substantiated with specific evidence that directly connects external factors to project delays.
Compensation Beyond The Date Of The Offer Of Possession Is Not Justifiable: NCDRC
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Subhash Chandra (member) in a case against Shipra Estate, held that compensation for delayed possession is typically granted only until the valid offer of possession. In this context, the claim for compensation beyond the date of the possession offer is deemed unjustifiable.
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Subhash Chandra, dismissed a revision petition alleging deficiency of service against Oriental Insurance.
NCDRC Holds DLF Home Developers Ltd. Liable For Deficiency In Service, Orders A Refund
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has ruled in favor of the complainants in a case related to a flat booked in the Hyde Park Estate, New Chandigarh. The judgment, delivered by the Commission, directs the developer to refund an amount exceeding Rs. 1 crore to the complainants.
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, comprising Subhash Chandra(President) and Bharatkumar Pandya (member), in a case relating to Oasis Landmarks, held that in the event of a contract breach, it is reasonable to forfeit only 10% of the fundamental sale price as “earnest money” and not more.
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, consisting of Ram Surat Ram Maurya (President) and Bharatkumar Pandya (member), held that the buyer cannot be made to wait for an infinite period to deliver possession, considering such a delay as deficiency of service.
Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising Rajan Sharma (Judicial Member) and Bimla Kumari (Female) held Emirates Airlines liable for deficiency in service for ignoring the request to provide water to the Complainant's son and subsequently behaving rudely while dismissing the request at 2 occasions. The bench directed it to pay Rs. 1.5 Lakhs (Compensation and Litigation Costs) to the Complainant.
State Consumer Commission, Uttar Pradesh
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh, led by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar, has ruled in favor of homebuyer against Sahara Prime City Ltd. The case sheds light on the challenges faced by the complainants who, despite substantial payments, were denied possession of their allotted unit. This decision emphasizes the imperative for accountability in real estate transactions and sets a significant precedent for consumer protection in the industry.
State Consumer Commission, Uttar Pradesh
State Consumer Commission, UP presided over by Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar, the Chairman, declared a verdict in favor of the appellant, Ketan Kumar Singh, in a dispute against S.M. College of Veterinary Sciences and Animal Research. The appeal was filed against the order of the District Consumer Protection Commission, Mathura. The appellant sought relief under the Consumer Protection Act, presenting his case against the college's refusal to refund his fees.
State Consumer Commission, Uttar Pradesh
The State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh, presided by Justice Ashok Kumar (President) held Air India liable for deficiency in services and directed to pay compensation and refund for the tickets.
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ernakulam
Food Poisoning: Kerala Consumer Forum Directs Bakery To Pay Rs.50,000 Compensation To Family
Case title: Santhosh Mathew v K N Bhaskaran
The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ernakulam recently ordered a Bakery to pay compensation of 50,000 rupees to a family affected by food poisoning on consumption of its food articles. The Bench comprising President D B Binu and Members Ramachandran V and Sreevidhia T N also commended the efforts taken by the family in taking action against the bakery.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-VI, New Delhi
Case Title: Sandeep Kumar Mishra vs Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. (IRCTC) and Anr.
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-VI, New Delhi bench comprising Poonam Chaudhry (President), Bariq Ahmad (Member) and Shekhar Chand (Member) held IRCTC and Northeastern Railway liable for deficiency in services for failure to refund the ticket when the passengers remained in the waiting list on the day of the journey. The bench directed them to refund the ticket price and pay Rs. 25,000/- to the Complainant for litigation cost.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurdaspur (Punjab)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurdaspur (Punjab) bench comprising of Lalit Mohan Dogra (President) and Bhagwan Singh Matharu (Member) held Cholamandalam General Insurance Company liable of deficiency in services for falsely repudiating the claim citing non-supply for the documents by the Complainant. The bench directed it to pay Rs. 85,800 to the Complainant and expressed concerns over the repudiation of valid claims in an overly technical manner.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (Chandigarh)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (Chandigarh) bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President), Surjeet Kaur (Member) and Suresh Kumar (Member) and Suresh Kumar Sardana (Member) held PNB Housing Finance Ltd. liable for imposing prepayment charges on the loan and delay in delivery of loan cheque. The bench directed it to refund the deducted amount and pay Rs. 10,000/- compensation and Rs. 8,000/- litigation costs.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurdaspur (Punjab)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurdaspur (Punjab) bench comprising of Lalit Mohan Dogra (President) and Bhagwan Singh Matharu (Member) held HDFC Bank liable for deficiency in service for closing the Complainant's bank account based on non-submission of Aadhar Card. Considering the mandatory requirement of compliance with KYC norms per circular and the absence of proper intimation to the complainant, the bench directed it to reactivate the account and pay Rs. 5,000 compensation and Rs. 3,000/- litigation costs to the Complainant.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kapurthala (Punjab)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kapurthala (Punjab) bench comprising Dr Harveen Bhardwaj (President), Rajita Sareen (Member) and S. Kanwar Jaswant Singh (Member) held Punjab State Power Corporation and Sub-Divisional Officer, (Ucha Sub-division) liable for deficiency in services for false disconnection of meter electricity connection. The bench directed it to pay Rs. 25,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- for litigation cost.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jind (Haryana)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jind (Haryana) bench comprising of A.K. Sardana (President) and Neeru Agarwal (Member) held the Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) liable for deficiency in service for false repudiation of the claim filed by the Complainant stating that benefits of the policy were fixed and not dependent on the actual expenses incurred during the treatment. Further, LIC failed to disburse the expenses incurred by the Complainant towards his surgery stating it was not a “Major Surgery”. The bench directed it to reimburse the claim and pay a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- to the Complainant, along with Rs. 10,000/- litigation expenses.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jind (“Haryana)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jind (“Haryana) bench comprising A.K. Sardana (President), Neeru Agarwal (Member) and GD Goyal (Member) held Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company liable for deficiency in services for failure to pay the loss of crop incurred by the Complainant which was insured by him under Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna. The bench directed it to disburse Rs. 74,686/-, pay Rs. 10,000/- compensation for mental agony and Rs. 10,000/- for litigation expenses to the Complainant.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuttack (Odisha)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuttack (Odisha) bench comprising Debasish Nayak (President) and Sibananda Mohanty (Member) held LIC, India liable for deficiency in services for failure to pay maturity amount and periodic payments of the insurance policies to the Complainant. Along with the timely disbursal of the insurance amount, the bench directed it to pay Rs. 50,000, as compensation, to the Complainant.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sangrur (Punjab)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sangrur (Punjab) bench comprising of Jot Naranjan Singh Gill (President) and Sarita Garg (Member) held State Bank of India liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for not crediting the pension in the Complainant's account for seven years. The bench directed it to pay Rs. 15,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- for legal costs to the Complainant.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Chandigarh
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Singh (Member) held Star Union Dai-ichi Life Insurance Company Limited liable for deficiency in services for failure to pay minimum surrender value of the Insurance Company. The bench directed it to pay the surrender value, compensation and litigation costs to the Complainant.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karur (Tamil Nadu)
Misplaced Courier In Transit, Karur District Commission Directs DTDC To Pay Rs. 2 Lakhs Compensation
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karur (Tamil Nadu) bench comprising Thiru. N Pari (“President) and Thiru A.S. Rathinasamy (Member) held DTDC Express Courier Service liable for deficiency in services for misplacing the Complainant's courier set to be delivered in Singapore. Further, it also failed to adequately resolve the Complainant's concerns, despite several attempts at communication. The bench directed it to pay Rs. 2 Lakhs compensation and Rs. 10,000/- legal costs to the Complainant.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mysore (Karnataka)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mysore (Karnataka) bench comprising of A.K. Naveen (President), M.K. Lalitha (Member) and Maruthi Vaddar (Member) held Sharp Watch Investigation & Security (SWISS) liable for deficiency in services for failure to pay Rs. 6,41,439 as salary to the Complainant who was employed as a counsellor at the observation centre. It continued to deduct a certain part of the Complainant's salary without any justified reason. The bench directed it to pay Rs. 6.4 Lacs to the Complainant along with Rs. 50,000/- compensation and Rs. 5,000/- litigation costs.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District), Delhi
Failure To Repair Manufacturing Defects; North Delhi District Commission Directs HP To Pay Rs 60.4k
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District), Delhi bench comprising of Ashwani Kumar Mehta (Member) and Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member) held HP liable of deficiency in services for not rectifying the manufacturing defects of the laptop sold to the Complainant. The bench directed it to pay Rs 60,490 to the Complainant.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur (Kerala)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur (Kerala) held Syska LED Lights Private Limited (“Syska”) liable for deficiency in services for failure to repair the power bank purchased by the Complainant which was under warranty. The bench directed Syska to refund the purchase amount and pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation to the Complainant.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuttack (Odisha)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuttack (Odisha) bench comprising Sri Debasish Nayak (President) and Sri Sibananda Mohanty (Member) held UPSC Pathshala (Coaching Institute) liable for failure to refund the appropriate coarse fee as per its T&C after the Complainant faced several issues with its website and outdated teaching methodologies. Out of Rs. 40,000/-, the District Commission directed the Institute to refund Rs. 35,324/-, pay Rs. 50,000/- for mental agony and harassment, along with Rs. 10,000/- for the cost of litigation.
Ernakulum District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Ernakulum District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench, consisting of Mr. D.B. Binu (President) along with Mr. V. Ramachandran, and Mrs. Sreevidhia T.N. as members, allowed a consumer complainant against the Proprietor, M/s JC Machinery. The complaint alleged that the complainant, a small-scale packaging industry owner, had purchased a "sheet separator machine" with specific features from the opposite party. However, upon delivery, the machine was found to be defective and lacked the promised specifications, suffering a breakdown. While holding J C Machinery liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practices, the Consumer Commission directed the owner of J C Machinery to refund the broken machine's price along with other charges and compensation. While deciding the complaint, the bench also made an observation with respect to the 2019 Act, noting that the 2019 Consumer Protection Act adopts a more consumer-friendly approach. It emphasizes transparency and a shift from the traditional concept of "buyer beware" to "seller beware" for enhanced consumer protection.