Advanced Search Results

Prudential Capital Markets Ltd., Calcutta Vs. State of A.P. and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : ConsumerConstitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227; Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2(1), 3, 12 and 27(1); Indian Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 10-E and 58-A; Reserve Bank of India Act - Sections 45-Q and 45-QA; Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138; CLB Regulations, 1991 - Regulation 21; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections - 9; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections - 193, 195, 196 and 228; Banking Laws (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1963; Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections - 34; Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections - 9;

Reported in : 2000(5)ALD418; 2000(5)ALT468; [2002]108CompCas441(AP)

Calcutta is the petitioner. In all the petitions they prayed for a writ of prohibition, prohibiting the District ConsumerDisputes Redressal Forum (hereafter called 'the District Forum') or the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereafter called the State

The Registrar, University of Madras and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Consumer

Reported in : (1995)2MLJ367

in this batch of writ petitions, one relating to the validity of some of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Act No. 68 of 1986), (hereinafter called 'the Act') and the other relating to the

Sanjay R. Kothari and anr. Vs. South Mumbai Consumer Disputes Redressa ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Consumer

Acts : Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 13(4), (5) and (6); Maharashtra Consumer Protection Rules, 2000 - Rules 4(7), 8(7), 9(1) and (6)

Reported in : AIR2003Bom15; 2002(4)ALLMR617; 2002(6)BomCR637; (2002)4BOMLR760; 2003(1)MhLj804

D.B. Bhosale, J.1. These two writ petitions involve common issue as to whether parties before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short 'Consumer Forum') and Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, 'State Commission') are entitled

Indian Medical Association Vs. V.P. Shantha and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Consumer

Acts : Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2, 2(1), 3, 10, 12, 13, 14, 14(1), 16 and 20; Constitution of India - Article 265; Indian Medical Council Act; Specific Relief Act;Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act, 1993

Reported in : AIR1996SC550; 1996(1)BLJR281; (1996)98BOMLR343; [1996]86CompCas806(SC); 1996(1)CTC119; (1995)2GLR1806; JT1995(8)SC119; 1996(6)KarLJ689; (1996)112PLR1; 1995(6)SCALE273; (199

so, in what circumstances, a medical practitioner can be regarded as rendering 'service' under Section 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Connected with this question is the question whether the

The Secretary, Thirumurugan Co-operative Agricultural Credit Society V ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Consumer

Acts : Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 - Sections 34, 34(3), 75(3), 90 and 156; Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2(1) and 3; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 9; Indian Contract Act, 1972; Sale of Goods Act, 1930; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1960; Standard of Weights and Measures Act, 1976; Motor Vehicles Act, 1938 - Sectio 165; MRTP Act 1969; Prevention of Adulteration Act, 1954; Arbitration Act; Contract Act, 1872

Reported in : AIR2004SC448; 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)108; [2004]118CompCas253(SC); (2004)1CompLJ339(SC); 2004(2)MhLj581; (2004)2MLJ94(SC); 2004MPLJ242(SC); 2003(10)SCALE635; (2004)1SCC305; 2004(1

to the respondents demanding payment of loan amount with interest thereon. The respondents filed petitions in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thiruchirapally seeking direction to the appellant to release the paddy bags pledged on receipt of

Torrent Power Ltd. Vs. Kevalchand Dhanraj Bhandari

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Consumer

Acts : Consumer Protection Act, 1986; Electricity Act, 2003 - Sections 127, 153(5), 156 and 173; Electricity Act, 1910; Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948; Electricity Regulatory Commission Act, 1998; Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227

Reported in : AIR2008Guj15

the supply was disconnected. On 17-6-1996, the amount of Rs. 15,000/- ad hoc was paid and the respondent consumer preferred Complaint No. 413/97 before the Consumer Forum of Ahmedabad City on 28-5-1997. In response to the proceedings

State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Shyam Sunder Gupta and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Consumer

Acts : Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 10; Consumer Protection Rules, 1987 - Rule 3

Reported in : RLW2003(4)Raj2081; 2003(3)WLC690

Association and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan (3). Following questions are referred to this Larger Bench:-1. Whether .President, consumer Forum gets salary of a District Judge?2. If a person already in service is appointed as President, Consumer

The Registrar, University of Madras, Chepauk, Madras - 600005 and Othe ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Consumer

Reported in : (1995)IIMLJ367

in this batch of writ petitions, one relating to the validity of some of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Act No. 68 of 1986), (hereinafter called 'the Act'), and the other relating to the

Dr. C.S. Subramanian Vs. Kumarasamy and Others

Court : Chennai

Subject : Consumer

Reported in : [1996]86CompCas747(Mad)

writ petitions involved for determination certain common and identical issues currently in controversy in the Medical circles and consumer litigation relating to the applicability or otherwise of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Central Act

Economic Transport Organization Vs. Charan Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : ConsumerInsurance

Acts : Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2 and 14(1); ;Carriers Act, 1865 - Sections 8 and 9; ;Consumer Protection Act, 1988 - Section 2; ;Limitation Act - Section 14; ;Marine Insurance Act, 1963 - Section 79; ;Contract Act, 1872 - Section 140; ;Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 3, 6 and 130; ;Stamp Act; ;Insurance Law

Reported in : JT2010(2)SC271,2010(2)SCALE427,2010(2)LC1004(SC)

in favour of the second respondent on 15.2.1996. Thereafter, respondents 1 and 2 filed a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ('Act' for short) against the appellant before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Dindigul, claiming