ive
User not Logged..
India's Biggest Headnotes Library over 53.69 Lakhs Headnotes
    Free Artificial Intelligence Drafting  

    Free Artificial Intelligence Case Analyzer  

   AI Submission Generator   

Latest Cases

(341) M/S. NPP ENERGY LIMITED Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 2(1)(g), 21(b) — Deficiency in service — Insurance claim repudiation — Insurance Company repudiated claim based on suspicion of intentional fire and exaggerated claim — Held, Insurance Company failed to provide cogent evidence for non-accidental nature of fire — Mere suspicion is not enough to deny liability — Insurance Company also failed to adhere to prescribed timelines for claim settlement — Repudiation set aside, claim allowed.
India Law Library Docid # 2418220

(342) PASHMINA WATERFRONT BUYERS ASSOCIATION Vs. LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — Commercial purpose — Whether a buyer is a consumer or investor — Burden of proof — For a buyer to be considered an investor engaged in a commercial purpose, it must be proven that they are in the business of buying and selling property for profit — Mere renting of property does not constitute a commercial purpose — Party alleging commercial purpose must provide documentary evidence to support their claim.
India Law Library Docid # 2418221

(343) LATE JAGIR SINGH (DECEASED) Vs. GREAT MOHALI AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal — Dishonest deduction of amounts by builder — Builder failed to deliver possession of apartment as per the Letter of Intent (LOI) — Complainant sought refund of deposited amount along with interest — Builder deducted a significant sum citing breach of conditions and forfeiture, refunding a lesser amount — State Commission partially allowed complaint, directing builder to pay a smaller sum with interest — Appellant challenged the State Commissio
India Law Library Docid # 2418222

(344) NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. M/S. KESHODWALA FOODS AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against State Commission Order — Part allowance of complaint regarding insurance claim for flood damage — Insurance company challenging reliance on surveyor's report and alleged breach of policy conditions.
India Law Library Docid # 2418223

(345) BALASAHEB MANIKRAO WAGH KHULLOD Vs. ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURNACE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 51(1) — First Appeal — Appellant's claim for balance IDV of vehicle and punitive damages — Dismissal of appeal due to no illegality or material irregularity in State Commission's order — State Commission's acceptance of Surveyor's assessment of loss.
India Law Library Docid # 2418224

(346) AIR INDIA LIMITED Vs. MRS. LATA SUBHASH POL AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 19 — Appeal against State Commission order — Appeal allowed, State Commission order set aside, Complaint dismissed — Complex issues of fact, unauthorized possession, police complaints, and alleged fabrication of documents not amenable to summary adjudication by Consumer Commission — Parties advised to approach Civil Court for remedy.
India Law Library Docid # 2418225

(347) DANDU HAINDAVI ARUNA JYOTHI Vs. JET AIRWAYS INDIA LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 10-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revision Petition — Similar facts and questions of law — Consolidation of petitions.
India Law Library Docid # 2418226

(348) MAKE MY TRIP (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Vs. DR. S. NAGARAJAN[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 09-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21 — Revision Petition — Order of State Commission — Setting aside — Appeal allowed by State Commission, directing refund and compensation — Petitioner challenged order on grounds of misinterpretation of terms and conditions regarding prior intimation for cancellation and visa rejection.
India Law Library Docid # 2418219

(349) SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. ABHISHEK KUMAR TIWARI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-09-2024
Insurance — Claim — Denial — Vehicle insurance policy — Accident and fire — Insurance company closed claim due to non-furnishing of documents by complainant nor cooperation with surveyor — State Commission ordered payment of full IDV with interest and costs — Appeal filed by insurance company — Held, claim was not repudiated but closed for want of documents — Complainant's exaggerated claim rejected by State Commission — Insurer's communications for discharge voucher and documents were not respo
India Law Library Docid # 2418240

(350) LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. MADALAMBIKA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Revisional Jurisdiction — Scope is limited and only to be exercised when State Commission has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, failed to exercise vested jurisdiction, or acted illegally or with material irregularity — National Commission cannot interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower Fora unless there is illegality or material irregularity — Reliance placed on Rubi (Chandra) Dutta Vs. M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
India Law Library Docid # 2418241

(351) UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN FREIGHT CARRIERS AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 2(1)(d), 21(b) — Consumer — Commercial Purpose — Complainant engaged a freight carrier for transportation of mustard oil for commercial sale. Held, complainant is not a 'consumer' under Section 2(1)(d) with respect to the freight carrier as the service was availed for commercial purposes.
India Law Library Docid # 2418242

(352) DR. NTR UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES Vs. NAGALLI UDAYA SREE AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 58(1)(b) — Revision Petition — Appeal against Order of State Commission — Dismissal of Appeals and Upholding District Forum Order — Interpretation of "Service" in Educational Matters.
India Law Library Docid # 2418243

(353) RAKESH JAIN Vs. AUDI INDIA AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 06-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Appeal against State Commission Order — Delay in filing — Condonation of delay granted.
India Law Library Docid # 2418245

(354) SNAPSOUL MEDIA PRIVATE LTD AND OTHERS Vs. KUSHAGRA TRIVEDI AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 05-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 51 — Appeal to National Commission — Pre-deposit — Mandatory pre-deposit of 50% of the amount ordered by the State Commission is required for the National Commission to entertain an appeal. The purpose of this pre-deposit is to prevent frivolous appeals and it has no connection with the grant of a stay.
India Law Library Docid # 2418244

(355) STAR HEALTH & ALLIED INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. RANJAN MOHAPARTA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 19 Appeal against State Commission order Delay in filing Condonation of delay Delay of 33 days in filing appeal condoned in the interest of justice.
India Law Library Docid # 2418248

(356) SBI LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. KUSUM LATA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-09-2024
Insurance Law — Group Insurance Scheme — Coverage Dispute — Repudiation of claim due to lack of opt-in and premium payment — Insured covered by Group Insurance Scheme only if they opt-in and premium is paid, with certificate being merely informative and subject to payment.
India Law Library Docid # 2418246

(357) M/S. HONDA SIEL CARS INDIA LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. MANU K. BHANDARI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in service — Foul smell from AC unit — Expert report confirmed foul smell but did not establish manufacturing defect — Dealer responsible for rectifying the defect — Compensation awarded to the complainant.
India Law Library Docid # 2418247

(358) ATUL MADAN Vs. M/S MAX INDIA LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 2(1)(a)(i), 2(1)(g), 13, 14(1)(d), 24A — Negligence — Medical Negligence — Deficiency in Service — Hip Implant Surgery — Defective Product — Recall of Product — Causation — Loss of Income — Damages — Compensation — Court's Duty — Expert Opinion — Limitations — Appeal — Damages for bodily injury — Pecuniary & Non-pecuniary damages — Just and fair compensation — Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, 'the Act') — Sections 21 (a) (1) and 22 — Complaint fil
India Law Library Docid # 2418249

(359) MRS. LALITA RAJPUROHIT Vs. M/S JOHNSON & JOHNSON LTD. AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 14(1)(d), 13(4) — Defective Goods and Deficiency in Service — Compensation — When defective goods cause bodily injury, compensation must be awarded under the law of torts for such injury — Principles for awarding compensation include pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, such as medical expenses, loss of earning, pain and suffering, loss of amenities, shortened longevity, inconvenience, hardship, discomfort, disappointment, frustration and mental stress —
India Law Library Docid # 2418250

(360) MAPIN PUBLISHING PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 02-09-2024
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 24 A — Limitation — Condonation of delay — Appellant sought condonation of delay of 394 days in filing appeal — Explanation for delay was seeking legal opinion, appointing counsel, arranging voluminous documents, and difficulty coordinating from another state — Held, delay was neither intentional nor deliberate, but also that the explanation was not satisfactory or plausible with extenuating circumstances.
India Law Library Docid # 2418251