(141) M/S SEQUEL LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. Vs. SANWLI SHARMA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — Appellant logistics company's agreement with Respondent No. 4 (stem cell company) explicitly stated that neither party could make commitments on behalf of the other, and were not liable for the other's actions. Respondent No. 4 therefore could not pass on liability to the Appellant to the Complainants, as the Complainants had no direct contractual relationship with the Appellant. This excluded the Appellant from being a necessary party India Law Library Docid # 2420373
(142) M/S. JAGDISH WOOLLEN'S (P) LTD. Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — FIR — Insurance Claim — Indemnity — Delay in settlement — Application of depreciation against reinstatement value — Calculation of claim amount — Role of surveyor's report — Court's power to examine surveyor's report — Necessity of second surveyor — Payment within specified period — Costs. India Law Library Docid # 2420371
(143) D PRABHU Vs. J. GOVINDARAJ[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 69 — Condonation of Delay — Limitation period prescribed is a legislative command and must be strictly followed. India Law Library Docid # 2420372
(144) O.P. SRIVASTAVA Vs. MAHENDRA TANK AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 & 2019 — Section 27 (1986 Act) / Section 72 (2019 Act) — Execution proceedings — Liability of former director — Appellant resigned as director before complaint was filed against the company — Apex Commission held that a former director who resigned before the consumer complaint was instituted cannot be held liable for the company's obligations or the execution of the decree — The State Commission erred in issuing warrants against the appellant ignoring documentary e India Law Library Docid # 2420370
(145) M/S. ROHIT EXTRACTIONS PVT. LTD. Vs. M/S. AMARDEEP PACKAGING[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 Section 51 Appeal against State Commission Order Delay in filing appeal condoned for stated reasons. India Law Library Docid # 2420358
(146) NISHA T.S. Vs. BIOTECH PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against State Commission's order — Delay in filing — Delay of 41 days condoned. India Law Library Docid # 2420359
(147) NEETA SINGH Vs. HDFC STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 51(1) — Appeal against State Commission order — Condonation of delay — Delay in filing appeal was condoned based on reasons provided in the application. India Law Library Docid # 2420360
(148) M/S. NIRMAN REALTORS AND DEVELOPERS LTD AND OTHERS Vs. HARISH RATNAKAR NAIK AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 Consumer Protection — Delay in Filing Appeals — Condonation of Delay — Sufficient Cause — The appellant sought condonation of a 454-day delay in filing an appeal, citing the time taken to identify and consult legal counsel. India Law Library Docid # 2420361
(149) STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. SHEETAL NAVNATH VAIDYA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Certain provisions — Deficiency in service — Failure to inform discontinuation of insurance cover — Bank's duty to inform borrower of discontinuation of insurance cover, especially when it was offered as part of loan agreement — Failure to provide personal notice constitutes deficiency in service. India Law Library Docid # 2420362
(150) DR. NAYAN THARA AND ANOTHER Vs. SUBAIDA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 21(b) Revision Petition Medical Negligence Deficiency in Service Blood transfusion and Doctor's registration Court examined the evidence and arguments from both parties. India Law Library Docid # 2420363
(151) ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. RISHI WATCH CO.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Rehearing of evidence — Not permissible unless State Commission's order is illegal, arbitrary or perverse. India Law Library Docid # 2420364
(152) BINOD KUMAR YADAV Vs. SAMRAT AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986 SECTION 21(B) REVISION PETITION SCOPE OF Appeals against District Forum and State Commission orders regarding vehicle repossession and deficiency in service National Commission's role in revision. India Law Library Docid # 2420365
(153) VASANTIBEN ALIAS VARSHABEN LAXMAN DAFADA Vs. BAJAJ ALLIANZ LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Delay Condonation — Delay in filing petition condoned based on reasons stated in the application. India Law Library Docid # 2420366
(154) SWARNA KAUR Vs. SBI LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Insurance — Repudiation of claim for non-disclosure of material facts — Appeal allowed by State Commission dismissing complaint — Petitioner filed revision petition against State Commission's order — Held, insurer rightly repudiated claim due to non-disclosure of drug addiction treatment as it is a material fact which affects the risk. India Law Library Docid # 2420367
(155) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. MANHARLAL G. MODI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Money Insurance Policy — Interpretation of terms — Claim repudiation — Interpretation of policy terms and conditions is crucial for determining insurer's liability — Policies are to be read as a whole, and specific clauses, including exclusions, must be strictly construed — Complainant sought claim under Money Insurance Policy for loss of cash during transit — Insurer repudiated claim citing policy excluded transit from Daman and use of motorcycle — Lower consumer India Law Library Docid # 2420368
(156) M/S. MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. Vs. SEVAKRAM BHUJANGRAO ZOD AND OTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Vehicle Repossession — Finance company seized the complainant's vehicle for overdue loan installments. The lower forums found that the company failed to issue a proper notice with a seven-day grace period before repossession, as required by the loan agreement, thus constituting a deficiency in service. The revision petition challenged these findings. India Law Library Docid # 2420369
(157) FORTIS HEALTH CARE (INDIA) LTD. (PRESENTLY FORTIS HEALTH CARE LTD.) AND OTHERS Vs. MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT FORTIS ESCORT HOSPITAL[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against State Commission's order — Medical Negligence — Death of son following surgery — Compensation awarded — Appellants challenging the order — Court to decide on merits. India Law Library Docid # 2420354
(158) ECGC OF INDIA LTD. Vs. BLOSSOM GROCERY & FOODS INDIA PVT. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against State Commission's Order — Delayed filing — Condonation of short delay in filing appeal in the interest of justice. India Law Library Docid # 2420355
(159) LATE MOHAN S. KALE (SINCE DECEASED) MRS. CHHAYA MOHAN KALA REP. THROUGH HIS LRs. SAHYADRI AND OTHERS Vs. HILLARI VICTOR D'SOUZA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against State Commission Order — Delay in filing — Condoned in the interest of justice due to sufficient reasons. India Law Library Docid # 2420356
(160) MAHIPAL CHAUDHARY Vs. MAX BUPA HEALTH INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-11-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Scope — National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can only interfere with orders of State Commission if they suffer from material irregularity and cannot be sustained. India Law Library Docid # 2420357