Mumbai Court November 2009 Judgments

Mrs. Kalyani Raut, Jui Cooperative Housing Society, Thane Vs. Dr. Mani ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri P. N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member. (1) This complaint has been filed by Complainant Mrs. Kalyani Raut, alleging medical negligence on the Part of the Opposite Parties who are Doctors by profession. (2) Stated briefly, the case of the Complainant is as under: According to Complainant, her husband Bharat Raut was suffering from some illness. He had approached Opposite Party No.3 Dr. Mahale on 19.04.2003 with complaints of swelling above medial aspect of right elbow joint. Opposite Party No.3- Dr. Mahale advised him to undergo operation in Millennium Hospital. Opposite Party No.3 falsely assured Complainant that Millennium Hospital is well equipped to perform major surgeries and to handle any complications and there are well qualified doctors in Millennium Hospital for performing surgery. As advised, her husband Mr. Raut got admitted in Millennium Hospital on 21.04.2003 at 11.00 p.m. Mr. Raut was taken to the operation theatre at 08.00 a.m. on 22.04.2003. The...

Bakshi Steels Ltd. a Registered Company Under the Companies Act Throug ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2010(1)MhLj55

A.H. Joshi, J.1. Heard learned Adv. Mr. W.G. Charde for the petitioner and learned Adv. Mr. C.S. Kaptan for respondent No. 1. Perused annexures to the petition and judgments cited at bar.2. Petitioner herein is a manufacturer of metallic castings, which are, inter alia, used as inputs by Railways in the manufacturing of cement concrete railway sleepers.3. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have placed with petitioner an order for one lakhs pieces of 'Malliable Iron Casting Insert' , described briefly as 'MIC inserts' . Copy of Work Order-cum-agreement is dated 6th December, 1993, which is at Annexure-A to the Writ Petition at Page Nos. 12 to 22.4. It is seen that in the process of supply, the petitioner had to deliver the goods freight prep-paid to the convenient Railway Station, or when transported by road, the delivery has to be done, freight pre-paid and goods have to be delivered to the designated representative of Railway at the factory/work site.5. Whenever 'MIC inserts' are delivered, thos...

Laxmibai W/O Maruti Satpute, Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2010(112)BomLR59

A.V. Nirgude, J.1. The appellants are challenging the judgment and order passed by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-2 Ahmednagar, (henceforth be referred as the ld. judge) in Sessions Case No. 50 of 2006. The learned Judge, convicted all the appellants of the offence under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and further convicted the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code also.2. The appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are husband and wife and happened to be the parent-in-laws of the deceased Sangita, the wife of acquitted accused namely Rajendra. The appellant No. 3 is another son of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2.3. The facts of the prosecution in nutshell are as follows:The deceased Sangita got married to accused Rajendra in the year 1995. Initially, this couple resided with the joint family. But, thereafter, the couple started living separately, in their new house. The appellant Nos 1 and 2, the parent...

Manik Alias Gangajirao Zugara More ‘gulmohar’ Shrinagar Lane ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1. Complainant- Manik alias Gangajirao Zugara More has filed this complaint against Rajasthani and Gujrathi Charitable Foundations Poona Hospital and Research Centre-O.P.No.1 and also against Port Trust Hospital, Wadala, Mumbai-O.P.No.2 alleging medical negligence on their part in respect of treatment given by both hospitals to his son-Mahendra More. 2. According to the complainant, Mahendra slipped off his motorcycle on Sinhagad Road at about 10.30 p.m. on 23/02/1997. One passerby took him to Madhukar Hospital on Sinhagad Road and since his son has having head injury, he was brought to Poona Hospital/O.P.No.1 and admitted in the said hospital. He was admitted in Intensive Care Unit (I.C.U.) of O.P.No.1 and necessary treatment was given. According to the complainant, his relative used to wait day and night outside I.C.U. to monitor the health of Mahendra. Necessary medicines, injections and equipments were brought. His son was ...

Joshi’s Business Associates Vs. Prakash Sankar Arbune

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Mrs. S.P. Lale, Honble Member This appeal is filed by org. O.P. in consumer complaint No.185/1998 passed on 24/02/1999 by District Consumer Forum Sangli, whereby the Forum below directed the O.P. to pay compensation of Rs.1,30,000/- together with interest @ 14% p.a. and compensation for mental agony of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.10,000/- towards cost. The case of the complainant in the Forum below was that he entered into a Hire Purchase Agreement with O.P. on 26/04/1996 for purchase of Mahendra Jeep bearing No.MH-10-C-3194. As per agreement, complainant was to repay loan installment of Rs.10,864/- as hire purchase charges per month for 36 months to the O.P. According to the complainant, upto 20/04/1998 complainant paid Rs.1,87,522/- to the O.P. The complainant also paid Rs.44,000/- as security deposit to the O.P. It is alleged by the complainant that in the month of February 1998 O.P. illegally without notice repossessed the vehicle of the complainant. After repossession of said vehicle, ...

Barclay Bank Plc, Mumbai and Another Vs. Mr. K.P. Sreejith

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order:- Per Justice Mr. S.B. Mhase, Honble President: Undisputed things are as follows: The respondent is a credit card holder, which is called as Barclays Card. He has purchased certain goods on 07/10/2007 amounted to Rs.918/- approximately. The bill was not given by the bank. When the arrears were demanded over phone, immediately, the cheque of this amount has been deposited by the respondent on 17/11/2007. The cheque was cleared on 19/11/2007 and amount has been credited in the appellants account. However, it appears that for delayed payment the bank has levied certain charges and debited an amount of Rs.383.10 from the account of respondent. Therefore, the respondent (org.complainant) has filed a consumer complaint with the District Consumer Forum, Central Mumbai. We heard Adv. Shri S. Hussain for the appellant (Org.Opp.Party). The whole dispute centrally rounds in respect of first bill tendered by the bank. Ld.Counsel Shri Hussain for the appellant submits that the first bil...