(1) M/S. MAKEMYTRIP (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Vs. SARWAN KUMAR SHARMA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 28-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in service — Flight reschedulement — Duty to inform — Travel agent's role — Complainants booked flights with a travel agent (petitioner) for GoAir. Flight was rescheduled earlier. Complainants arrived at the airport based on the original booking time and missed the flight, incurring costs for new tickets. They filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service. The petitioner travel agent argued India Law Library Docid # 2434656
(2) TEJAS DUTTA AND OTHERS Vs. M/S. LOGIX HEIGHTS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 27-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 35(1)(a) and 35(1)(c) — Joint complaint — No statutory requirement to file an application for permission to file a joint complaint under Section 35(1)(a) in view of the decision in Brigade Enterprises Limited vs. Anil Kumar Virmani. India Law Library Docid # 2434660
(3) AAYSHA Vs. NOVAS PATHOLOGY LAB AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 24 & Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 68 — Finality of Orders — Orders passed by Consumer Forums become final if no appeal is preferred — An order, even if incorrect or without jurisdiction, must be set aside by the appropriate forum through a valid challenge, and cannot be ignored or India Law Library Docid # 2434658
(4) UTPAL KUMAR RAY Vs. SUB POST MASTER (HSG-I), NEW MARKET POST OFFICE, KOLKATA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 24-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revisional Jurisdiction — National Commission's power is limited and can only be exercised if the State Commission or District Forum has failed to exercise their jurisdiction, exercised it when not vested, or exceeded it due to illegality or material irregularity. Concurrent findings of fact by lower forums should not be interfered with unless they suffer from illegality, India Law Library Docid # 2434659
(5) DIVISIONAL REGIONAL MANAGER H.O NORTHERN RAILWAY FEROZEPUR AND ANOTHER Vs. SUJINDER SINGH[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 23-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 / Railways Act — Deficiency in Service — Delay in train service — Liability of railways — Railways are liable for compensation if delay is caused by planned maintenance and modernization work, as this is not a situation beyond their control — Passengers must be informed of such delays. India Law Library Docid # 2434657
(6) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. AMIT WALIA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 17-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 58(1)(b) — Revision Petition — Jurisdiction of National Commission — Revisional jurisdiction of the National Commission is limited and should only be exercised in cases where the State Commission has acted without jurisdiction, failed to exercise jurisdiction, or acted illegally or with material irregularity — National Commission cannot interfere with India Law Library Docid # 2434655
(7) M/S. KHANNA POLYRIB PVT. LTD. Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-10-2025 Insurance Law — Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy — Fire Occurred — Claim for loss of plant, building, machinery, and stocks — Dispute over assessment of loss and depreciation — Held, surveyor's exclusion of welding rods and embossing rolls (spares) lying near machinery was illogical as they also suffered damage in the fire. (Para India Law Library Docid # 2434652
(8) ARUN SHRIVASTAV Vs. U.P. POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Revision Petition — Reappreciation of evidence — National Commission’s jurisdiction in revision is limited and does not act as an appellate forum; it cannot reappreciate evidence unless there is jurisdictional error, material irregularity, or perversity in the findings of the lower fora. India Law Library Docid # 2434653
(9) ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SHEELA MEGHWAL[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 16-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 58(1)(b) — Revision Petition — Scope of Revisional Jurisdiction — National Commission's revisional jurisdiction is limited and should only be exercised when the lower forum has acted without jurisdiction, failed to exercise jurisdiction, or acted illegally or with material irregularity — Interference is warranted only if findings are against law, pleadings, evidence, or are perverse — India Law Library Docid # 2434654
(10) SHREE BHAVNAGAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD. Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-10-2025 Insurance Policy — Bankers Indemnity Policy — Fraudulent transactions — Bank's claim for loss due to employee's fraud — Insurance company repudiated claim citing negligence and breach of policy terms — Held, policy covers losses due to dishonest acts of employees, but not those arising from the insured bank's own negligence or wilful India Law Library Docid # 2434646
(11) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. M/S. JEEWAN AUTO INDUSTRIES AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revisional jurisdiction — Limited scope — Can interfere only if findings are perverse, arbitrary or contrary to law — Concurrent findings of Fora below cannot be lightly discarded. India Law Library Docid # 2434647
(12) M/S. SANWARIA AGRO OILS LTD. Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-10-2025 Insurance Law — Spontaneous Combustion — Claim for loss due to spontaneous combustion — Absence of scientific evidence — Repudiation of claim upheld where complainant failed to provide credible scientific or technical evidence to establish spontaneous combustion or the extent of damage, despite repeated requests from the surveyor and insurer. India Law Library Docid # 2434648
(13) IDBI BANK LTD. Vs. SRI. BIJTH SIMON[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Loss of Title Deeds by Bank — A bank's failure to safeguard original title deeds of a borrower, deposited as security for a home loan, and its significant delay in informing the borrower about the destruction of these documents due to a fire at a third-party storage facility, constitutes a clear deficiency in service and negligence. India Law Library Docid # 2434649
(14) HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LTD. Vs. VIPUL CHAUDHARY AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 17(1)(a) and Section 19 — Jurisdiction of State Commission — Appeal against District Forum Order — Coram Non Judice — An order passed by a State Commission which is not duly constituted as per the minimum statutory requirement of at least two members is a nullity in the eyes of law — Such an India Law Library Docid # 2434650
(15) M. ASHOK KUMAR Vs. K. RAJASEKHAR AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 15-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Definition of "consumer" — Commercial purpose — Burden of proof — The service provider bears the burden of proving that a service was obtained for a commercial purpose, not the complainant. The standard of proof is a preponderance of probabilities, and the facts and circumstances of each case must be evaluated to determine the dominant purpose of the transaction. India Law Library Docid # 2434651
(16) ANIL SINGH Vs. ICICI BANK PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-10-2025 Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 — Section 17 and Section 34 — Jurisdiction of Consumer Commission to stay SARFAESI proceedings — Consumer Commission lacks jurisdiction to stay or interfere with proceedings initiated under SARFAESI Act, as such matters must be raised before Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under Section 17 of the Act India Law Library Docid # 2434645
(17) AJAY JAIN AND OTHERS Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-10-2025 Insurance Law — Fire Policy — Repudiation of Claim — Grounds for Repudiation — Manipulation of Fire and Non-furnishing of Documents — Onus of Proof — Insurance company repudiated claim on grounds of manipulated fire and non-furnishing of documents. Evidence including fire department reports, investigator's report, and statements from fire officials indicated fire was caused by India Law Library Docid # 2434713
(18) ASHWANI KUMAR KUKKAR Vs. SKY KING COURIER COMPANY[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 51 — Second appeal — Scope — Limited to substantial question of law — Appeal can be entertained only if a substantial question of law is involved. India Law Library Docid # 2434714
(19) CHIEF MANAGER BANK OF BARODA Vs. DR. JAGANNATH GOVIND LAL AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Complaint — FCNR deposits — Complainant's claim that FCNRs 055185 and 0710758 remained unpaid — Bank's contention that these were renewed receipts in a series, with the last one paid on 05.06.2012. India Law Library Docid # 2434715
(20) PARITOSH UPADHYAY Vs. AXIS BANK LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Pecuniary Jurisdiction — Complaint dismissed due to lack of pecuniary jurisdiction as alleged deficiency in service stemmed from bank charges, not consideration paid for services. India Law Library Docid # 2434716