(21) SHIVAJIRAO MORE Vs. SIDDHANATH SAWANT AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — Definition — Purpose of purchase — Machinery purchased for running an industrial unit employing workers for commercial profit, not for livelihood by self-employment, does not qualify as a purchase by a "consumer" under the Act. India Law Library Docid # 2434717
(22) MR. JOYDEEP BANERJEE AND OTHERS Vs. RELIGARE HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-10-2025 Insurance Law — Repudiation of claim — Aviation training exclusion — Complainant obtained health insurance for pilot training in the US. Policy had an exclusion clause for aviation training. Complainant suffered injuries during training. Insurance company repudiated the claim based on the exclusion clause. Held, policy terms and conditions must be strictly construed. The exclusion clause was clearly India Law Library Docid # 2434718
(23) M/S. JASWANT NAGAR COLD STORAGE PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. PREM SINGH[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 12, 21(b) — Deficiency in Service — Cold Storage — Liability of licensee — Failure to comply with mandatory requirements of Section 17 of the U.P. Regulation of Cold Storages Act, 1976 regarding disposal of goods — This constitutes deficiency in service. India Law Library Docid # 2434719
(24) M/S PREMIUM ACRES INFRATECH PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. GURINDER SINGH GILL AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 17(2)(c) — Territorial Jurisdiction — Consumer forums are not courts — A clause in a buyer agreement specifying jurisdiction of civil courts does not oust the jurisdiction of consumer forums — Part of cause of action arose in Chandigarh where the buyer agreement was executed, India Law Library Docid # 2434720
(25) MANAGER AGRICULTURE INSURANCE COMPANY OF INDIA LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. BRANCH MANAGER PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 2(7) — Consumer — Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) — Compulsory insurance for loanee farmers — Issue of whether a farmer is a "consumer" of the insurance company when insurance is compulsory — Held not relevant as the dispute was about inter se liability between the bank and the insurance company. India Law Library Docid # 2434721
(26) MRS. RICHA NAVENDU SHRIVASTAVA Vs. DR. SANGRAM KARANDIKAR AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-10-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Medical Negligence — Adverse reaction to IV fluid — Allegation of medical negligence against surgeon, hospital, and anaesthetist. Patient admitted for piles surgery, surgery postponed, then IV fluid administered. Patient developed shivering, fever, and other complications. Cause of death disputed, with potential involvement of Leptospirosis or adverse reaction to IV fluid. The India Law Library Docid # 2434722
(27) AJANTA HOSPITAL & IVF CENTRE PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. AJAY CHATURVEDI AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Liability for medical negligence — Appellants hospital and doctor not liable for medical negligence — State Commission's finding that bedsores developed due to improper hygiene and lack of nursing care at Appellants' hospital leading to Stage-IV bedsores not based on proper estimation of circumstances. India Law Library Docid # 2434710
(28) M/S SHRI JEE ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 29-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Jurisdiction — Insurance claims — Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy — Dispute over claim repudiation and assessment of loss payable. India Law Library Docid # 2434711
(29) AUTOPACE NETWORK PVT LTD. Vs. VIKAS GOGNA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 29-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in service — Delay in delivery of vehicle — Complainant booked a car and paid a booking amount. Vehicle was delivered after a delay of 25 days. Consumer forums awarded compensation and litigation costs. The National Commission noted that the delay was significant but the compensation awarded was excessive and disproportionate to the actual loss or India Law Library Docid # 2434712
(30) USHA GUPTA AND OTHERS Vs. M/S MAX SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 19-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Medical Negligence — Causation — Circumstantial evidence — While claims of medical negligence were made regarding a Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) surgery and subsequent complications leading to Hypoxic Ischemic Encephalopathy, the Commission found itself unable to establish a direct causal link between the surgeon's actions and the patient's condition. India Law Library Docid # 2434661
(31) FIITJEE LTD. Vs. SHLOK AGARWAL ALIAS SHLOK VIJAY AGARWAL[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revisional Jurisdiction — Limited scope — National Commission cannot re-appreciate evidence like an appellate court; can only interfere in cases of jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or illegal/irregular exercise of jurisdiction. India Law Library Docid # 2432815
(32) KRISHNA DEV SAH Vs. BRANCH MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORP, OF INDIA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 21(b) – Revisionary Jurisdiction – Limited scope – National Commission cannot re-appreciate evidence like an appellate court – Exercise of power only for jurisdictional error, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or illegal/material irregularity India Law Library Docid # 2432816
(33) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. ATUL METAL INDUSTRIES[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 12-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — Held, complainant not consumer as policy purchased for commercial purpose — Matter remanded by National Commission for decision on merits. India Law Library Docid # 2432817
(34) VIKRAMADITYA VENISHETTY Vs. DR. ANANT E. BAGUL AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(o), Section 12, Section 21, Section 22 — Deficiency in Service — Medical Negligence — In medical negligence cases, the standard of care is that of an ordinary competent medical practitioner exercising ordinary skill in that profession, not the highest level of expertise. A mere error in judgment or failure to achieve a desired outcome does not automatically constitute negligence India Law Library Docid # 2432818
(35) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. M/S. NAYYAR ELECTRONIC WORLD[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 21 Insurance Claim Repudiation Delay in Intimation Burglary and House Breaking Policy Admitted Facts: Delay of six days in intimation by insured to insurer, FIR lodged with police promptly Repudiation Letter cited delay as one ground. Policy Clause 4 requires "immediate notice". IRDA Circular dated 20.09.2011 advises against repudiation solely on delay due to unavoidable India Law Library Docid # 2432819
(36) M/S. SRI SHADI LAL ENTERPRISES LTD. Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-09-2025 Insurance Law Fire and Special Perils Policy Molasses Tank Burst Repudiation of Claim Cause of Loss Wear and Tear vs. Chemical Reaction/Pressure Build-up Surveyor's Report vs. Expert Analysis Material Non-Disclosure Exclusion Clause Applicability Strict Interpretation of Policy Terms. India Law Library Docid # 2432820
(37) SMT. KANTA Vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 08-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Insurance Law — Duty of utmost good faith (uberrima fides) — Insured’s duty to disclose material facts arises to enable insurer to assess risk — Material fact must have a clear nexus to the risk assumed or cause of death. India Law Library Docid # 2432821
(38) AMARJEET LIDDER AND OTHERS Vs. LT. GEN. U.K. GANGULI AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Deficiency in Service Misrepresentation and Non-Disclosure of Material Facts Travel agents assured elderly clients of a safe and comfortable Europe tour with 3-star accommodations, but provided substandard services including denied bottled water, personally collected visa documents, distant accommodations, and inadequate local transport. Agents also failed to disclose India Law Library Docid # 2432822
(39) TRILOKI NATH SINGLA AND ANOTHER Vs. ICICI BANK AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-09-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 24A — Limitation — Continuing cause of action — Complaint filed after two years of cause of action barred unless sufficient cause shown — Payment of EMIs does not constitute a continuing cause of action for challenging interest rates unless the wrong itself continues — Mere continuation of damage does not make a wrong continuing. India Law Library Docid # 2432823
(40) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. PRABHDEEP KAUR BINDRA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 29-08-2025 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 21(b) Revisionary Jurisdiction Interference is warranted only for jurisdictional error, material irregularity, or perversity. The State Commission's findings were based on facts and established principles, not on conjectures or surmises. No perversity or patent illegality was demonstrated. India Law Library Docid # 2432824