Consumer Cases Weekly Round Up: 19th To 25th February, 2024
Apoorva Pandita
29 Feb 2024 9:00 PM IST
Supreme Court Medical Negligence | Supreme Court Awards Rs 10 Lakh Compensation To Patient Who Developed Hoarseness In Voice After Trainee Gave Anaesthesia Case Title: J. DOUGLAS LUIZ (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES VERSUS MANIPAL HOSPITAL | CIVIL APPEAL NO.1700 OF 2024 Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 134 The Supreme Court recently awarded Rs. 10 lakhs...
Supreme Court
Case Title: J. DOUGLAS LUIZ (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES VERSUS MANIPAL HOSPITAL | CIVIL APPEAL NO.1700 OF 2024
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 134
The Supreme Court recently awarded Rs. 10 lakhs compensation to a patient who developed hoarseness in his voice due to medical negligence committed by doctors while administering anaesthesia. The patient (now deceased) claimed compensation of Rs. 18,00,000/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs only), against the faulty operation done by the Manipal hospital which resultantly developed hoarseness in his voice. However, the District Forum had suo moto arrived at a rough and ready figure of ₹5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs only) payable as compensation to the appellant without furnishing any reasons for arriving at the said figure.
Apple Has No Duty To Trace Stolen iPhone Using Unique Identity Number: Supreme Court
Case Title : Apple India Pvt Ltd v. Harish Chandra Mohanty and others
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 138
The Supreme Court obliterated an observation made by the Odisha State Consumer Commission that Apple India has the duty to trace a stolen iPhone with the help of a unique identity number provided by it. The Supreme Court stated that the observation made by the Consumer Commission was "unwarranted". The Bench Comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma was hearing an appeal filed by Apple India against the Consumer Commission's order, which was passed in a complaint filed over stolen iPhone.
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by AVM J. Rajendra AVSM VSM (member), held Oriental Insurance liable for deficiency in service over cancelling the insurance claim solely based on delayed the intimation of the complainant regarding the theft of their insured vehicle.
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Justice Ram Surat Maurya (presiding member) and Bharatkumar Pandya(member), held if possession is offered after obtaining an “occupation certificate,” the home buyer is contractually obligated to take possession, failing which would result in a breach of contract.
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Justice Ram Surat Maurya (presiding member) and Bharatkumar Pandya(member), dismissed a review petition against Cholamandalam Insurance Company and held that it is the fundamental duty of the insured to prove that the insurance claim is payable under the insurance policy.
Calcutta High Court
Case Title: The Secretary, E & NF Railway Junior Co-operative Credit Society Limited, Eastern Railway vs Sri Jyotish Chandra Sarkar & Anr.
The Calcutta High Court single bench of Justice Prasenjit Biswas held that consumer forum cannot assume jurisdiction when a special statue prescribes for arbitration and designates a forum for adjudication of disputes. It held that a special law takes precedence over a general law.
Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana bench comprising Mr Naresh Katyal (Presiding Member) held National Insurance Company Ltd. Liable for failure to disburse insurance amount based on late intimation and commercial nature of the Claimant's business. The State Commission perused the evidence and found that the Insurance Company's surveyor assessed the damage and accepted liability.
West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal bench comprising Justice Manojit Mandal (President) held Green Tech IT City Private Limited liable for failure to deliver the promised residential unit within the time frame. The State Commission held that the buyer cannot be obligated to wait any longer in light of the fact that the Builder failed to complete the construction within the agreed-upon timeframe, despite legal notices.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Goa
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Goa bench comprising Mrs Varsha Bale (Officiating President) and Ms Rachna Anna Maria Gonsalves (Member) dismissed a complaint against National Insurance Company Limited. The State Commission refuted the Appellant's contention and held that the Insurance Company was not under any obligation to continue the insurance policy with the same terms after the natural expiry of the old policy held by the Appellant for 10 years.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhattisgarh
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhattisgarh bench comprising Justice Gautam Chourdiya (President) and Pramod Kumar Varma (Member) dismissed an appeal filed by Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) which repudiated the Complainant's claim based on failure to disclose a pre-existing illness. The State Commission found that while the Complainant had a previous medical history, LIC failed to specify which question in the insurance proposal was answered falsely, as the proposal was made 22 years after the mentioned treatments.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhattisgarh
The Additional bench, of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.T. Chandigarh, comprising Mrs Padma Pandey (Presiding Member) and Preetinder Singh (Member) held Yes Bank Limited liable for deficiency in service for failure to deliver the original copy of the dishonoured cheque to the Complainant. Even though the courier company lost the cheque, the State Commission held that it was the Bank's responsibility to deliver it safely.
Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bihar bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kumar (President), Shamim Akhtar (Member) and Ram Prawesh Das (Member) upheld an order pronounced by the District Commission, Vaishali against TATAAIG Life Insurance Company. The Insurance Company was held liable for wrongfully repudiating a valid claim of the Complainant based on non-disclosure of chronic disease in the proposal form. The State Commission reiterated that unless the undisclosed preexisting disease directly contributed to or caused death, it wouldn't disqualify the claimant from receiving benefits.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Nagpur Circuit Bench, Maharashtra
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Nagpur Circuit Bench, Maharashtra dismissed a complaint against Jupiter Hospital and its chief oncologist regarding failure to perform a whole-body PET scan timely which eventually led to the demise of the cancer patient. The State Commission observed that the Doctor carried out all necessary investigations in a prompt manner. Further, the PET Scan was optional and the patient came to the Hospital at a late stage when she was suffering from Stage II B of Cancer.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench Udaipur (Rajasthan)
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench Udaipur (Rajasthan) bench comprising Shri Surendra Kumar Jain (President) and Shri Liyakat Ali (Member) dismissed an appeal filed by a Customer of the State Bank of India (SBI) who alleged liability on part of the SBI for failure to resolve his complaint related to an unauthorized ATM Card transaction. The State Commission found no deficiency on the SBI's part because it conducted a proper inquiry after the alleged unauthorized ATM card transaction and found that the transaction could not have occurred without sharing confidential ATM Card details.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi bench comprising Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal (President), Ms Pinki (Judicial Member) and Mr J.P. Agrawal (General Member) dismissed a complaint against M/s Angel Broking Limited and gave the option to the Complainant to approach the appreciate civil court. The State Commission observed that the complaint involved complex questions of law and fact, which are better suited for resolution in regular courts rather than consumer forums.
Aurangabad (Maharashtra) State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Aurangabad (Maharashtra) bench comprising Dr Nisha A. Chavhan (Member) and Nagesh C. Kumber (Member) held Universal Sompo General Insurance Company liable for wrongfully repudiating the claim for 'Gopinath Mundhe Farmers Insurance Scheme' held by a deceased daily wage worker. The State Commission held that once accidental death was proven, insurance companies couldn't reject the claim based on the deceased's perceived unnecessary risk-taking.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hisar (Haryana)
Case Title: Kavita Rani vs IDBI Bank and Others
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hisar (Haryana) bench comprising Jagdeep Singh (President), Rajni Goyal (Member) and Dr Amita Aggarwal (Member) held SBI General Insurance Company Limited liable for deficiency in services for failure to appoint a qualified loss assessor within the prescribed time frame and for not conducting the loss assessment or settle the claim within the stipulated period under Pradhan Mantri Fasal Beema Yojna scheme. The bench directed it to pay Rs. 77,706.3/- to the Complainant for the loss of the insured crop and pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- along with Rs. 5,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by the Complainant.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panipat (Haryana)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panipat (Haryana) bench comprising Dr. R.K. Dogra (President) and Dr. Rekha Chaudhary (Member) held Oscar Super Speciality Hospital & Trauma Centre liable for deficiency in services for wrongfully charging the Complainant for the treatment despite him being an Aayushman card holder. The bench directed it to refund Rs. 20,615/- to the Complainant and pay compensation of Rs. 5,000/- along with Rs. 5,500/- for the litigation costs incurred by him.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held One 97 Communications India Limited (Paytm) liable for deficiency in services for failure to reverse the amount after a transaction failure which was reflected as "transaction status failure.” The bench directed it to refund Rs.826.37/- to the Complainant and pay a compensation of Rs.3,000/- along with Rs.3,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by him.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Goa
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Goa bench comprising Sanjay Motiram Chodankar (President) and Jayson Rodrigues (Member) held TATA AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. liable for deficiency in services for the delay in settling an insurance claim. The bench directed it to pay the claim of Rs. 17,531.26/- to the Complainant along with a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- for the metal agony incurred by him.
Bangalore Urban II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Failure To Initiate Full Refund As Per T&C, Bangalore District Commission Holds Myntra Liable
The Bangalore Urban II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising Vijaykumar M Pawal (President), B Devaraju (Member) and V Anuradha (Member) held Myntra liable for deficiency in services for failure to honour the 14-day return policy published on its website and for charging higher than the MRP on the packaging. The bench directed it to refund Rs.17,999/- to the Complainant and pay a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- along with Rs. 2,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by him.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held Oriental Insurance Company Limited liable of deficiency in services for false repudiation of claim filed by the Complainant. The bench directed it to pay the claim of Rs.30,338/- to the Complainant and pay a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- along with Rs. 10,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by him.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Chandigarh bench comprising Vijaykumar M Pawale (President), B Devaraju (Member) and V Anuradha (Member) held British Airways liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for failure to refund the ticket price despite cancellation of the flight. The bench directed it to refund Rs. 78,131/- to the Complainant and pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- along with Rs. 10,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by the Complainant.
Cuttack District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuttack (Orrisa) bench comprising Debasish Nayak (President) and Sibananda Mohanty (Member) held Myntra liable for deficiency in services for failure to refund excess amount deducted during a single online transaction.
U.T. Chandigarh District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I
Case Title: Vinod Kumar vs HDFC Ergo Health Insurance Ltd.
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held HDFC Ergo Health Insurance Ltd. liable of deficiency in services for repudiation of a genuine claim stating that the Complainant didn't disclose his pre-existing alcoholic liver disease. The bench directed it to pay the claim amount of ₹ 2,51,136/- to the Complainant and pay ₹ 20,000/- as compensation along with ₹ 10,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by him.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit - II (Central)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit - II (Central) bench comprising Sukla Sengupta (President) and Reyazuddin Khan (Member) held Tata Motors and its dealer liable of deficiency in services and negligence for selling a vehicle with manufacturing defeats and without inspection to the Complainant. The bench directed them to replace the defective vehicle and pay a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- along with Rs. 30,000 for the litigation costs incurred by the Complainant.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hisar (Haryana)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hisar (Haryana) bench comprising Jagdeep Singh (President), Rajni Goyat (Member) and Dr. Amita Aggarwal (Member) held HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited liable of deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for false repudiation of insurance claim on basis of non-submission of documents which were not essential for claim settlement. The bench directed it to pay the claim of Rs.25,300/- and pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the Complainant along with Rs.5,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by him.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hisar (Haryana)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hisar (Haryana) bench comprising Jagdeep Singh (President), Rajni Goyat (Member) and Dr Amita Agarwal (Member) held SBI General Insurance Company Ltd. liable for deficiency in services for failure to fulfil its duties under the operational guidelines of Fasal Beema Yojna. Despite the Complainant's timely intimation of loss, it held that the insurance company did not inspect the Complainant's field within the prescribed period. Furthermore, it held that the insurance company did not adequately explain the localization of claim intimation in their written statement and evidence.
Ernakulam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Ernakulam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, headed by D.B. Binu as President, alongside members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia. T.N. held that an affidavit stating that the food served was inferior in quality would be sufficient to prove the deficiency of service and discharge the onus on the customer.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kozhikode (Kerala)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kozhikode (Kerala) bench comprising Sri P.C. Paulachen (President), Smt. Priya S Bal (Member) and Sri V. Balakrishnan (Member) held Samsung liable for deficiency in service for its failure to provide resolution to the Complainant seeking to utilize a coupon code to buy Samsung Galaxy Buds Pro for a cheaper amount. The District Commission directed Samsung to pay a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- to the Complainant and Rs. 3,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by him.
Jodhpur (Rajasthan) District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (II)
The District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (II), Jodhpur (Rajasthan) bench comprising Shyam Sundar (President) and Balveer Khudkhudia (Member) held ICICI bank liable for deficiency in services for failure to block the credit card after the Complainant asked the customer care which subsequently resulted in an unauthorized transaction of Rs. 32,640/- under the credit card. The bench directed the bank to pay the transaction amount of Rs. 32,640/- to the Complainant along with compensation of Rs. 5,000/-.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-III, Hyderabad (Telangana)
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-III, Hyderabad (Telangana) bench comprising Sri M. Ram Gopal Reddy (President), Smt. J. Shyamala (Member) and Sri R. Narayan Reddy (Member) held Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) liable for deficiency in services. LIC repudiated a valid life insurance claim based on non-disclosure of the insured's subsequent policy with another insurance company. The District Commission observed that the second insurance policy at another company was availed after the LIC policy. Therefore, the question of non-disclosure did not arise. Thereafter, the District Commission directed LIC to pay Rs. 8 Lakh to the nominees along with Rs. 25k compensation and Rs. 5k litigation costs.
Jodhpur (Rajasthan) District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II
Cancellation Of Bus An Hour Before Departure, Jodhpur District Commission Holds Travel Agency Liable
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Jodhpur (Rajasthan) bench comprising Shyam Sundar (President) and Balveer Khurkhuria (Member) held Shri Nathnama Travel Agency liable for cancelling the passenger's bus at the last moment without any justifiable reason. The passenger was left stranded and had to incur additional expenses.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held Kotak Mahindra Life Insurance Company Ltd. liable for deficiency in services for repudiation of a genuine claim filed by the Complainant. The bench directed it to pay the claim amount of ₹ 79,90,953/- to the Complainant and pay a compensation of ₹ 20,000/- along with ₹ 10,000/- for the litigation costs.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held OnePlus and its service centre liable of deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for failure to provide a satisfactory solution to the genuine grievance of the Complainant for repair of the phone which was under warranty. The bench directed them to pay a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- to the Complainant along with Rs. 7,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by her.
Bangalore I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Bangalore I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising B. Narayanappa (President), Jyothi N (Member) and Sharavathi S.M. (Member) held Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. And its dealer liable for deficiency in service for failure to replace the rusted parts of the Complainant's car and rectify the defects free of cost under warranty.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held Wedding Wish liable of deficiency in services for failure to provide matching profiles to the Complainant which didn't align with his preferences. The bench directed it to refund Rs. 25,000/- to the Complainant along with a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and Rs. 7,500/- for the litigation costs.
Ernakulam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Ernakulam District Commission Holds Oneplus Liable For Failure To Provide Spare Parts
The Ernakulam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, headed by D.B. Binu as President, alongside members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia. T.N. held OnePlus over deficiency in service due to failure to provide the necessary spare parts for the product to address the defects.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Limited liable of deficiency in services for repudiation of a genuine claim where the Complainant was involved in an accident which resulted in complete loss of the vehicle and death of his helper. The bench directed it to pay the claim amount of ₹ 14,99,000/- to the Complainant and pay a compensation of ₹ 40,000/- along with ₹ 10,000 for the litigation costs.
Jaipur (Rajasthan) District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Jaipur (Rajasthan) bench comprising Shri Subesingh Yadav (President) and Shrimati Neelam Sharma (Member) held State Bank of India (SBI) liable for deficiency in service for wrongfully deducting money from the Complainant's account and failing to resolve the issue.
