Andhra Pradesh Court September 2011 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.
B. Siva Shankar Reddi Vs. the Ashok Leyland Ltd. Rep. by Is Chairman 9 ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2011
ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) Appellant is unsuccessful complainant. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that he was educated but un-employed. He purchased two Ashok Leyland Tuskars manufactured by the respondents on 26.2.2000 vide Ex. A6 with a warranty of 18 months, and took delivery of it. He purchased the said vehicle by taking finance from Sundaram Finance Ltd. He was earning amounts by hiring the said vehicles. On 13.3.2001 they found that there was a crack in chassis on right side housing beside diesel tank. When it was sent for periodical maintenance to R2 it undertook to rectify the defects. When he complained about the manufacturing defect pointed out above it was refused on the ground that it was not a manufacturing defect. Again he informed R2 on 30.10.2001 viz., the principal about the defect. However, it did not respond. Since the same was developed during the warranty period the respondents were under obligation to replace. Since i...
Dr.Y.Savitha Devi Vs. Smt P.Shailaja W/O Sri P.Jesuratnam
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2011
Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The opposite party has preferred the appeal against the order of the District Forum which directed to pay an amount of `3,00,00/- to the complainant and `5,000/- towards costs. 2. The complainant approached the opposite party in the month of April 2006 for prenatal consultation. The opposite party confirmed the pregnancy and had got conducted 8 scannings between 14.6.2006 and 6.1.2007. The scanning report dated 14.8.2006 had shown that the foetus developed cardiac problem, it was not informed to the complainant and no advice was given for termination of pregnancy. On 14.1.2007 the complainant was admitted in opposite partys nursing home as the labour pains started and on the same day the opposite party performed caesarean operation. A child was born. The opposite party also performed tubectomy on the next day. Later, Dr.T.Adinarayana, Childrens Specialist checked the newly born child and informed the complainant that ther...
J. Gopala Krishna Rao Vs. M. Sudhakar, Chairman and Managing Director ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2011
ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) Appellant is unsuccessful complainant. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that the respondent a developer floated a venture for sale of house plots of 200 sq.yds each at Rs. 1,000/- per sq.yd. He became a member paid advance of Rs. 40,000/- on 9.10.1999 whereupon plot No. 183 was allotted by issuing pass book No. 1547. Later he paid the amounts in instalments totalling Rs. 82,000/-. However, the respondent did not execute agreement of sale as per clause-4 of the pass book on the ground it would be executed on payment of Rs. 1 lakh. The respondent did not provide copies of documents for verification of title. More over procurement of land was not even made. When the respondent agent demanded the amount he asked him to come with copies of documents in order to pay remaining balance but he did not turn up. Therefore he got legal notice issued followed by complaint seeking registration of sale deed in his favour after r...
C. Ramesh Vs. M/S. Vijayalakshmi Enterprises Rep. by Its Proprietor an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-12-2011
ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) Appellant is unsuccessful complainant. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that during January, 2006 he placed an order with R1 for supply of Kirloskar diesel generator of 15 KVA at Rs. 1,50,000/- including taxes on condition of door delivery. Accordingly he paid the amount. However, R1 sent 10 KVA generator. After deliberations he agreed to replace the 10 KVA generator with 15 KVA generator. When he returned 10 KVA generator on 10.3.2006 R1 supplied the same generator erasing the mark 10 KVA and imprinted 15 KVA. On that again he demanded to replace the generator with 15 KVA. Alleging that it amounts to deficiency in service filed the complaint for a direction to R1 to replace the defective 10 KVA genitor with 15 KVA generator manufactured by R2. 3) R1 resisted the case, however, it admitted placement of order for supply of 15 KVA generator at Rs. 1,50,000/-, and that he supplied 10 KVA generator initially. However ...
Smt. Mutyal Shakuntala and Others Vs. Kuppa Suseela and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-12-2011
ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) This is an appeal preferred by the opposite parties 1 to 4 against the order of the Dist. Forum directing them to execute the registered sale deed along with Op5 and handover the vacant possession of flat No. 204 to the complainant along with it this application to condone delay of 206 days in preferring the appeal. 2) It was alleged in the application that complainant/R1 filed a complaint against them seeking directions to complete the construction of flat No.204 in 2nd floor, execute registered sale deed and deliver vacant possession besides compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs and costs basing on an agreement dt 1.2.2007. They pleaded that they never executed any agreement nor received any notice from the Dist. Forum. They came to know about the filing of the complaint only when they received notice in E.A. proceedings. Ops 5 and 6 forged their signatures on Ex. A1 agreement, appointed an advocate and filed counter on their behal...
Smt. P. Aruna Kumari (Died) Rep. by D. Seshaiah Vs. the Senior Divisio ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2011
ORAL ORDER: (Per Honble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao, President) 1) Appellant is unsuccessful complainant. 2) The case of the complainant in brief is that her husband P. Krishna Mohan had taken three policies one for Rs. 50,000/- and remaining two for Rs. 1 lakh each. First policy was commenced on 28.2.1997 the other two policies commenced from 27.3.1999 and 28.3.2000 respectively. In all the three policies she was kept as nominee. He had also taken three more policies keeping his mother and brother as nominees. Her husband died on 11.3.2001 during the subsistence of the policies. When requisite claims forms were submitted while settling the claim for Rs. 50,000/- it repudiated the claim for the remaining two policies on the ground that he suffered from bilateral pulmonary tuberculosis (BPTB). Assailing the repudiation she claimed Rs. 1 lakh each covered under the policies together with compensation and costs. 3) The opposite party insurance company resisted the case. While admitting the is...
M/S.Shriram Chits (P) Ltd., Rep. by Its Branch Manager Vs. Rachamalli ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2011
Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The opposite party is the appellant. The appeal is challenge to the order of the District Forum which had awarded a sum of `63,960/- with interest @18% p.a. and costs of `3,000/-. 2. The opposite party is a chit fund company. The complainant joined as a member in one of the chits bearing No.NXL XX/27commencing from 27.09.2001 in the opposite party chit fund company. The value of the chit was `5,00,000/- payable in 50 monthly instalments at the rate of `10,000/- per month. The complainant paid 9 instalments. The complainant paid `63,960/- towards 9 instalments after deducting the dividends. The complainant participated in the auction held on 27.04.2002 and became successful bidder and agreed to forego discount of `2,01,000/-. The opposite party demanded the complainant to produce three sureties and accordingly the complainant offered three sureties but the opposite party did not accept the sureties and demanded to give liq...
Smt G.Manikyamma Vs. the Chief Executive Officer the Chittoor Cooperat ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2011
Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) The complainant is the appellant. She has filed the complaint seeking for direction to the opposite party cooperative bank to return the title deeds and to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/-. The case of the complainant as set up in the complaint is that she had purchased a building through registered sale deed dated 5.2.1968 with the funds from out of her self savings and since then she has been in possession and enjoyment of the property. The complainant had obtained loan from the opposite party bank under loan account no.2129 on 25.10.1999 and it was renewed till 16.1.2004. The loan amount obtained by the complainant was Rs.1,00,000/- and she had repaid the amount on 24.12.2007. The opposite party bank had not returned her title deeds and postponed to return them from time to time. The complainant had not mortgaged the property nor had she raised any other loan. The opposite party bank had retained the title deeds of the com...
B. Venkateshwarlu Vs. the Branch Manager, Branch Office, Bajaj Allianz ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2011
Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. The District Forum has dismissed the complaint opining that the rider of the vehicle was not holding effective driving license at the time of accident.For the sake of convenience and felicity of expression, the parties are referred to as they have been arrayed in the complaint. 2. The complainant had purchased the vehicle Bajaj Platina BS II at Venkataramana Automobiles, Nalgonda and got registered it with Registration No.AP-24-R-4045. On 7-11-2007 the complainant insured the vehicle with Opposite Party No.1 for the period from 7-11-2007 to 6-11-2008. The insurance policy covers own damage, personal accident and third party damages to the vehicle. On 26.2.2008 the complainant gave his vehicle to his friend namely Pulimoru Janaki Reddy who went to Kodad Town riding on the vehicle on his personal work. While his friend was driving the vehicle on left side of the road towards K...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »