(341) AKSHAY DOSHI Vs. G. SUNDAR AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 05-08-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Deficiency in Service Builder's Obligation A builder accepting advance payment for a specific flat, issuing a receipt, but failing to execute a formal agreement to sell or hand over possession, constitutes a deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. India Law Library Docid # 2416968
(342) CENTRAL ACADEMY EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY AJMER THROUGH PRESIDENT SMT. SHOBHA SUMAN MISHRA Vs. M/S. JAIN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY THROUGH PARTNER AJAY KUMAR JAIN[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-08-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) defining 'Consumer' — Educational Institutions — Whether 'consumer' — An educational institution is not a 'consumer' if its activities are of a commercial nature, especially if it involves setting up industrial or technical institutions for profit-making by charging fees. India Law Library Docid # 2416963
(343) UNION BANK OF INDIA Vs. MR. MUZAMMIL AND ANOTHER[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-08-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 41 — Appeal — Condontation of Delay — Sufficient Cause — Appellant failed to provide adequate justification for the significant delay in filing the appeal, relying on internal bureaucratic procedures and the general statement of court vacations, which were deemed insufficient to establish a "sufficient cause" as required by law. India Law Library Docid # 2417703
(344) M/S. VATIKA LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. DR. KHOZEM A DIVAN AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-08-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 2(1)(d), 2(1)(g), 24A — Deficiency in service — Inordinate delay in possession — Allottee's right to refund — Delay in offering possession beyond a reasonable period, after receiving timely payments, constitutes a deficiency in service — Buyer can't be forced to wait indefinitely for possession — Failure to obtain Occupancy Certificate before offering possession is a breach of contract — Allottee is entitled to seek refund of deposited amount. India Law Library Docid # 2416964
(345) BAIBHAB SUR Vs. SWAPAN SENGUPT AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-08-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Appeal against State Commission order — Delay condoned in interest of justice. India Law Library Docid # 2416965
(346) VICE CHAIRMAN, LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS Vs. ALOK SRIVASTAVA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-08-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Deficiency in Service Development Authority's Liability A development authority allotted a house, received payments, but failed to complete construction and hand over possession. The authority attempted to refund the deposited amount after significant delay, citing contractor negligence. The consumer commission held the authority liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. This established that public authorities, even non-profit entities, are not India Law Library Docid # 2416966
(347) LATE SH. SURESH CHAND GUPTA THROUGH HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND OTHERS Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-08-2024 Limitation — Condonation of Delay — Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 24A — Provision is peremptory, requiring complaints to be filed within two years from accrual of cause of action unless delay is condoned for sufficient cause recorded in writing — Consumer forums must take notice of and give effect to Section 24A — Failure to do so renders orders illegal and liable for setting aside — Delay must be explained with rational, reasonable, and realistic reasons. India Law Library Docid # 2416962
(348) MR. MAHINDER SINGH Vs. M/S MAGMA LEASING LTD.[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-08-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 15 — Appeal — Limitation — Condonation of Delay — Sufficient Cause — Misplacement of file and delay in contacting counsel not considered sufficient cause for condoning delay in filing appeal due to lack of diligence and bonafide. India Law Library Docid # 2417702
(349) VINOD KUMAR Vs. ROYALE EMPIRE AND OTHERS[CHANDIGARH CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-08-2024 Consumer Protection — Deficiency in Service — Failure to deliver possession — Builder failed to deliver possession of a residential unit by the committed date despite the buyer paying the entire sale consideration — This constitutes a deficiency in service. India Law Library Docid # 2417699
(350) MR. RAVI Vs. SARGAM INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.[DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 01-08-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Repeal and Saving — Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Proceedings initiated under the old Act will continue under the old Act — The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is prospective in nature — Matters pending or rights/obligations created before the implementation of the 2019 Act will be adjudicated under the 1986 Act. India Law Library Docid # 2417701
(351) MOHAMED ABBAS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-07-2024 CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986 — SECTIONS 2(1)(d), 22(A) — CONSUMER DISPUTE — EMPLOYEE OF RAILWAYS RECEIVING MEDICAL TREATMENT AT RAILWAY HOSPITAL — NOT A CONSUMER — MEDICAL TREATMENT PROVIDED AS A WELFARE MEASURE, NOT FOR MONETARY CONSIDERATION — LACK OF DEFICIENCY IN SERVICE — PETITIONER NOT ENTITLED TO INVOKE CONSUMER FORUM JURISDICTION. India Law Library Docid # 2416449
(352) GURVINDER KAUR Vs. DR. BHARTI GUPTA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-07-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Delay in filing — Condoned — Revision Petition filed against State Commission's order setting aside District Forum's order which partly allowed consumer complaint — Delay of 4 days in filing revision petition was condoned. India Law Library Docid # 2416450
(353) DR. AMBUJAKSHA SINHA MAHAPATRA AND ANOTHER Vs. AMALENDU BHATTACHARJEE[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-07-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition filed by OP-1 (Doctor) and OP-2 (Nursing Home) against the State Commission's order allowing the Complainant's appeal and setting aside the District Forum's order dismissing the complaint — State Commission found deficiency in service and medical negligence on the part of OP-1 for allegedly wrong diagnosis and treatment for acute pancreatitis, based on USG and MRCP reports, despite clinical symptoms — District Forum had dismissed India Law Library Docid # 2416451
(354) STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. BIRESH CHANDRA GANGOPADHYAY AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-07-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 2019 Section 51 Appeal against State Commission order Order partly allowing complainant's claim directing bank to reimburse unauthorized transactions with interest and compensation Appeal filed by the Bank. India Law Library Docid # 2416452
(355) SREE KARUNA NURSING HOME & SCANNING CENTRE AND ANOTHER Vs. KAYALA TRINADHA SIVA SANKARA REDDY AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-07-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against Order of State Commission — Delay in filing — Condonation — Delay of 21 days in filing appeal condoned based on reasons stated in application. India Law Library Docid # 2416453
(356) AIR CANADA Vs. MINALI MITTAL AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-07-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against order of State Commission — Complainant booked return tickets with Jet Airways and Air Canada for journey from Chandigarh to Toronto — Faced issues: delay in boarding passes, locked washrooms emitting foul smell causing minor daughter to vomit, leading to deplaning, loss of luggage, distress and humiliation — State Commission allowed complaint for deficiency in service, unfair trade practices, and violation of human and child rights, aw India Law Library Docid # 2416454
(357) M/S. BHUPINDER TYRES WORKS Vs. NEW INDIAASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-07-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal — Filing delay — Condonation — Delay of 7 days in filing First Appeal — Condoned for reasons stated in application. India Law Library Docid # 2416455
(358) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. NOVEX ENTERPRISES[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 30-07-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 17 — Appeal against State Commission order — Insurance claim for damaged goods due to rain — Repudiation by insurer citing non-compliance with surveyor's document requests — State Commission directed payment of loss and compensation — Insurance company appealed, arguing cryptic order and lack of expert opinion — Held, State Commission's order was reasoned after remand and provided grounds for decision — Surveyor's report acknowledged receipt of documents, India Law Library Docid # 2416456
(359) BRANCH MANAGER, BANK OF BARODA (FORMALLY VIJAYA BANK) Vs. SURESH BALIGA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 29-07-2024 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in service — Insurance — Bank's role as proposer — A Jeweller obtained a Jeweller's Block Policy from an insurance company. The policy was negotiated and the proposal form was filled by the Branch Manager of the appellant Bank. The policy only covered premises at Door No. 4-108, but the burglary occurred at Door No. 4-111, which housed the Jeweller's main business and stock. The insurance company repudiated the claim because the damaged premises were no India Law Library Docid # 2416462
(360) DAGA AUTO DISTRIBUTORS Vs. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURNACE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 29-07-2024 Limitation Act, 1963 — Section 5 — Condonation of Delay — Explanation for delay was inadequate and unconvincing, particularly given the appellant's business background. Although COVID-19 related extensions were claimed, the period between September 2019 and March 2020 remained unexplained. India Law Library Docid # 2416457