ive
User not Logged..
Latest Cases

(61) VIKAS KUMAR Vs. ZONAL MANAGER, BANK OF INDIA[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 21-03-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 2(1)(g) – Banking Service – Deficiency – Unauthorized Withdrawal – Forged Signature – Duplicate Passbook – CCTV Footage – A bank (Bank of India) committed deficiency in service by: (a) issuing a duplicate passbook for the complainant’s Savings Bank account without his request; (b) subsequently honouring a withdrawal slip bearing a forged signature, leading to the unauthorized withdrawal of a large sum (Rs. 5,32,000/-) from the complainant’s account using t
India Law Library Docid # 2424496

(62) M/S. VISHWAKARMA ENGINEERING WORKS REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR, RAJESH SHARMA Vs. MR. H. RAVIGOWDA THE PROPRIETOR OF NRG INDUSTRIES[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 18-03-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 2(11), 2(7) — Deficiency in Service — Supply of Machinery — Substandard Quality — Failure to Install/Demonstrate — Expert Report — Concurrent findings by the District Forum and State Commission establishing deficiency in service on the part of a machinery supplier (Petitioner/OP) were based on evidence indicating failure to supply ‘Dall Mill Machinery’ of promised quality and capacity, delivery of substandard materials, failure to install and demonstrate t
India Law Library Docid # 2424497

(63) MRS. TARLA H. MALANI Vs. M/S THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-03-2025
Insurance Law — Personal Accident Policy — “Accident” — Meaning — Fall in Bathroom — Pre-existing Illness — Burden of Proof — Causal Link — A claim under a Personal Accident Policy requires the injury or death to result “solely and directly from accident caused by external violent and visible means” — A fall in a bathroom, resulting in head injury and subsequent death due to intra-cerebral bleed, may not qualify as an “accident” under the policy if the fall itself was likely caused by the insure
India Law Library Docid # 2424498

(64) M/S. PREMIER CAR SALES LIMITED Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-03-2025
Insurance Law — Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy — Exclusions — Loss due to Action by Lawfully Constituted Authority — Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) — Demolition Drive — Deficiency in Service — A claim under a 'Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy' for damage caused to the insured's property (boundary wall, roof, and parked scooters/motorcycles) was repudiated by the insurer — The damage occurred accidentally when the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA), a lawfully constituted au
India Law Library Docid # 2424499

(65) HYBRID COTTON SEEDS, FORTUNE HYBRID SEEDS LTD. Vs. BHUKYA BHADRU AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 13-03-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(g), 13(1)(c) — Defective Goods — Seeds — Burden of Proof — Requirement of Laboratory Test — Expert Opinion — Genetic Purity — To establish that seeds supplied are defective or lack genetic purity, leading to poor germination or yield, the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, under Section 13(1)(c), envisages obtaining a report from an appropriate laboratory after testing a sample of the goods — Where such a laboratory test is not conducted (due to reasons l
India Law Library Docid # 2424500

(66) LIBERTY OIL MILLS LIMITED Vs. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-03-2025
Insurance Law — Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy — Repudiation of Claim — Breach of Policy Conditions — Non-disclosure, Misrepresentation, Fraudulent Claims (General Conditions 1, 6(i)(b), 8) — Burden of Proof — Surveyor's Report — In a claim arising from a fire incident at an insured plant, the insurer repudiated the claim citing breaches of General Conditions 1 (Misrepresentation/Non-disclosure), 6(i)(b) (Failure to provide documents/proof), and 8 (Fraudulent claim/means) based on the f
India Law Library Docid # 2424502

(67) MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MARUTI UDYOG LTD.) Vs. SHRI DANISH SONDHI AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 11-03-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 2(11), 2(7) — Manufacturing Defect — Vehicle Airbags — Failure to Deploy in Accident — Deficiency in Service — Res Ipsa Loquitur — Expert Evidence — In a case involving a frontal collision with a stray animal resulting in significant damage to the front portion of a car and injuries to the driver, the failure of the front airbags to deploy constitutes a manufacturing defect and deficiency in service on the part of the manufacturer (Petitioner/OP-1) — Relyi
India Law Library Docid # 2424503

(68) M/S. INDO RAMA SYNTHETICS INDIA LTD. Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 07-03-2025
Insurance Law — Marine-cum-Erection All Risk Policy — Additional Customs Duty (ACD) Endorsement — Escalation Endorsement — Interpretation — Scope of Coverage — An Additional Customs Duty (ACD) endorsement in a Marine-cum-Erection (MCE) policy, providing indemnification for ACD incurred over and above the duty factored into the original sum insured, operates independently of any Escalation Endorsement (providing for increased cost up to a certain percentage —The ACD endorsement covers the actual
India Law Library Docid # 2424504

(69) SUB POST MASTER Vs. RAKESH KUMAR[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 05-03-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(g), 2(1)(d) — Deficiency in Service — Postal Department — Loss of Speed Post Article — Indian Post Office Act, 1898 — Section 6 — Immunity — Insurance — The loss of a Speed Post article (a laptop being returned by the complainant to the seller) by the postal department constitutes deficiency in service — The immunity provided under Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 for loss, misdelivery, or delay of postal articles is not applicable to def
India Law Library Docid # 2424505

(70) BITTAN KASHYAP Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 04-03-2025
Insurance Law — Standard Fire Policy — Description of Risk — Mistake in Policy — Stocks vs. Godown Building — Liability of Insurer and Bank (as Agent) — IRDA Regulations — Proposal Form — Where a fire policy, obtained by a bank as agent for the borrower (complainant) to insure a godown constructed with a bank loan and hypothecated to the bank, erroneously describes the risk covered as “stocks” instead of the “godown building”, both the insurer and the bank (acting as agent) are jointly
India Law Library Docid # 2424506

(71) SMT. URMILA CHAND AND OTHERS Vs. DR. ATUL CHABBRA AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-03-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (corresponding to Section 340, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) — Section 340 — Perjury — Initiation of Proceedings — Scope in Consumer Complaints — Medical Negligence — An application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. seeking initiation of perjury proceedings against opposite parties (doctor and hospital) in a pending consumer complaint alleging medical negligence, based on allegations regarding the doctor's educational qualifications, alleged manipulation of reco
India Law Library Docid # 2424507

(72) GLOBE ECOLOSGISTICS PVT. LTD. Vs. M/S. GE INDIA INDUSTRIAL PVT. LTD.[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 03-03-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Jurisdiction of State Commission — Coram Requirement — Sections 14(2), 16, 18 — Whether an order passed by a single Member (Judicial) of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission disposing of a consumer complaint is valid and within jurisdiction, in light of the composition and procedure requirements under Sections 14(2), 14(2A), 16 and 18 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, which arguably mandate a Bench of at least two members (President and one
India Law Library Docid # 2424508

(73) APOLLO HOSPITAL Vs. NAGORAO AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 28-02-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Medical Negligence — Standard of Care — Post-Surgical Complications — Ryle's Tube Misplacement — Determination of medical negligence against Petitioner hospital (OP-2) in the treatment of a patient with advanced throat cancer (Stage IV Hypopharynx) who developed complications (esophageal perforation, pyopneumothorax) following endoscopic dilation in 2006 — Assessment of alleged failure to exercise standard care during insertion of Ryle’s tube (feeding tube), speci
India Law Library Docid # 2424517

(74) RAM PRIT ROY Vs. TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTORS (P) LTD. AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 28-02-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 21(b) — Scope of Revisional Jurisdiction — Interference with Concurrent Findings — Extent of the National Commission's power under Section 21(b) to interfere with concurrent findings of fact rendered by the District Forum and the State Commission — Whether the National Commission can re-assess or re-appreciate evidence on record in revisional jurisdiction when the findings below are based on evidence and documents, in the absence of demonstrated
India Law Library Docid # 2424509

(75) DHL COURIER THROUGH DHL EXPRESS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. BAKSHI ENTERPRISES[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 28-02-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d)(ii) — ‘Consumer’ — ‘Service for Commercial Purpose’ Exclusion — International Exhibition — Whether a business entity (respondent) availing international courier services (appellant) to transport goods for display and promotion at an international trade exhibition, with the objective of promoting sales and business, does so for a "commercial purpose" within the meaning of the exclusion clause inserted by the 2002 amendment to Section 2(1)(d)(ii), th
India Law Library Docid # 2424510

(76) NILKANTH BIKARAM BHALAVI (DEAD) THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS Vs. M/S. A.K. GANDHI CARS AND ANOTHER[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 28-02-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(r) (Unfair Trade Practice) & Section 2(1)(g) (Deficiency in Service) — Sale of Old Vehicle as New — Allegation that a vehicle manufactured in the previous calendar year (2007) was sold and delivered as a new vehicle in the subsequent year (June 2008) at the price of a new model — Consideration of evidence suggesting the vehicle was not new or was previously allocated, such as erasure marks (whitener use) over a previous name in the service manual, fre
India Law Library Docid # 2424511

(77) SHEKHWATI JANANA HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL RESEARCH CENTRE AND ANOTHER Vs. ASHOK KUMAR BHATI AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 28-02-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Medical Negligence — Standard of Care — Breach of Duty — Haemorrhagic Shock in Pregnancy — Determination of medical negligence in the treatment of a critically ill pregnant patient (8 months gestation, Hb 3, severe bleeding, haemorrhagic shock) admitted to Petitioner No. 1 hospital — Allegations against treating doctors and hospital include: administering wrong blood group (based on alleged nurse statement); improper handling/storage/transfusion of blood (allegedl
India Law Library Docid # 2424512

(78) INDIAN BANK AND ANOTHER Vs. SMT. T. SREEKALA PUTHUPURACKAL HOUSE[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 28-02-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Banking Services — Home Loan Insurance (Mortgage Redemption Assurance) — IB Griha Jeevan Policy — Determination of deficiency in service against the Appellant Bank concerning the non-availability of life insurance coverage under the 'IB Griha Jeevan Policy' for a home loan availed by the Respondent/Complainant's late husband — Dispute centered on whether the loan sanctioned on 22.12.2008 fell under the Bank's 'Special Home Loan Scheme' (lau
India Law Library Docid # 2424513

(79) BABU SINGH SOLANKI Vs. MAX SUPER SPECIALITY HOSPITAL AND OTHERS[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 28-02-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Medical Negligence — Standard of Care — Complex Co-morbidities — Deferred Surgery — Cardiac Arrest — Determination of medical negligence in the treatment of a patient with a complex history (Pulmonary Blastoma, Synovial Carcinoma, post-chemo/radiotherapy) admitted for kidney stone removal — Assessment includes: adequacy of pre-operative evaluation identifying severe Left Ventricular Dysfunction (LVEF 25-30%); appropriateness of deferring planned surgery due to hig
India Law Library Docid # 2424514

(80) SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICE, HARDOI DIVISION, HARDOI, UP. AND ANOTHER Vs. SHASHI KANT BAJPAI[NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION] 28-02-2025
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Procedure — Res Judicata — Procedural Bar — Maintainability of Fresh Complaint after Dismissal for Default — Whether a fresh consumer complaint is maintainable on the same cause of action after a previous complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution and an application for its restoration was also dismissed, considering the principle that dismissal in default does not constitute a decision on merits barring a subsequent suit/complaint.
India Law Library Docid # 2424515