Andhra Pradesh Court May 2010 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sahara India Rep. by the Branch Manager and Another Vs. Shri Alapati S ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: May-12-2010
Oral Order (As per R. Lakshminarsimha Rao, Membe The two appeals have been filed by the opposite parties who are the same opposite parties in both the complaints C.C.No.46 of 2006 and C.C.No.96 of 2007 and the cause of action is the same for filing of both the complaints. Hence, it is proposed to dispose of the two appeals by way of a common order. The facts of the case as represented by the complainant are that his father during his life time joined Golden 7 Scheme offered by the opposite parties and opened on 8.7.1995 an account bearing No.18295000050 and another account bearing No.18295003741 on 31.8.1996. The father of the complainant paid a sum of Rs.12,300/- at the rate of Rs.300/- per month under the first mentioned account and an amount of Rs.4,200/- @ Rs.150/- per month in respect of the second account. The complainants father appointed him as his nominee for the benefits conferred under the two accounts. The complainants father died on 25.5.1999 and after the death of his fa...
State Bank of India Rep. by Its Branch Manager Vs. Vattaikunta Chinnas ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: May-12-2010
Oral Order (As per R. Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) The opposite party is the appellant. The appellant challenges the order directing it the amount of Rs.2,03,420/- with interest @9 % p.a. from the date of maturity besides the sum of Rs.!000/- awarded towards costs. The facts of the case as represented by the complainant are that the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.18,000/- each on 6.8.1992 with the opposite party under the E.W. Scheme. The amount on maturity is Rs.2,03,420/- and the due date is 6.8.2006. The opposite party issued pass books with A/c Nos. 79 amd 80. After the date of maturity of the amount, the complainant requested the opposite party to pay the amount due. The opposite party has not paid the amount. The complainant got issued notice through his advocate on 9.11.2006 for which there was no response from the opposite party. The opposite party resisted the claim inter alia contending that non payment of the amount does not amount to deficiency in service. As per the p...
The General Manager District Co-operative Central Bank Ltd. and Anothe ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: May-12-2010
Oral Order: R. Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member: The opposite parties no.1 and 2 are the appellants in all the four appeals. As the facts and circumstances which are the genesis of the appeals are similar and identical in all aspects, we propose to dispose of the appeals by the common order. F.A.No.1091 of 2007 is taken as the lead case. The facts of the case as narrated by the complainants are that the opposite parties no.2 and 3 had sanctioned crop loan varying from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.10,000/- to the complainants under their respective loan account numbers and collected crop insurance premium ranging from Rs.30/- to Rs.100/- proportionate to the loan amount sanctioned to the complainants no.1 to 9. The insurance coverage was provided for the risk on the crops for drought and floods. The State government of A.P. declared Loddabhadra Village, Palasa Mandal Srikakulam District as drought effected area on 27.11.1997. The General Insurance Corporation assessed the loss of the crop at 78.47% and ...
Dr. D. Srihari Rao Vs. M/S Wipro G.E. Medical Systems and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: May-12-2010
Oral Order (As per R.Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member) The complaint is filed against M/s Wipro G.E. Medical Systems seeking direction for refund of Rs.37 lakhs with interest @ 24% per annum in the alternative for replacement of equipment i.e., Voluson 730 Pro and an amount of Rs.25 lakhs towards damages in addition to the sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the costs. The averments of the complaint are that the complainant, a doctor by profession has been running a diagnostic centre in M/s S.V. Diagnostic Center at Tirupathi. The complainant purchased Voluson 730 Pro from the opposite parties in exchange with the old equipment which was valued at Rs.4,50,000/-. The complainant paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- and agreed to pay an amount of RS.11 lakhs in 60 monthly installments. Some time after the machine was installed, it posed various problems which were brought to the notice of the opposite parties no.1 and 2 by a letter dated 5.7.2005. The complainant requested the opposite parties either to replace...
Raj Kumar Agarwal and Others Vs. Farhat Hospital, Rep. by Dr.Farhat Hi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: May-12-2010
Oral Order: (Per Sri R. Laxminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) The complaint is filed seeking direction to the opposite parties no.1 to 6 to pay an amount of Rs.11 lakhs towards compensation for physical shock and mental agony, Rs.11 lakhs for loss of amenities of life, Rs.3 lakhs to the complainant no.1 for the loss of matrimonial comfort and Rs.5 lakhs to the complainants no.2 and 3 for the loss of love, affection and motherly superintendence and Rs.two lakhs towards medical expenses and Rs.25,000/- towards the legal expenses. The averments of the complaint are that the complainant no.1 got married to Smt Rekha Agarwal on 7.12.1996. After the marriage they were blessed with the second complainant on 1.6.1999. The second complainant was born through caesarian section in the opposite party no.1 hospital and during the delivery the wife of the complainant no.1 had a minor fluctuation of blood pressure which was explained by the doctors of the opposite party no.1 hospital to be a normal sit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›