Mumbai Court April 2009 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.
The Phaltan Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd., Phaltan Vs. Balkrishna Subhe ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-2009
Oral Order: Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member This appeal is filed by the original O.P. against the award/order dated 13/8/2008 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Satara. By the said award, Forum below directed to refund all the deposits of the complainants with interest prematurely. Aggrieved by the said order, original O.P. has filed this appeal. Notice was sent to the respondents, but they preferred not to accept the notice. They remained absent. It is deemed that they have been duly served in the circumstances obtainable. We heard Mr.Sandip Koregave-Advocate for the appellant on merits. We are finding that the Forum below had initially proceeded without written statement after having found that O.Ps were duly served. On the appointed date, O.P. had not filed written statement. Hence matter was ordered to be proceeded without written statement, but thereafter from the record it appears that at page 37, on 21/7/2008, Counsel for the appellant suo motu ap...
M/S. Ralhan Developers Vs. Dr. S.L. Maurya
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-2009
Oral Order: Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member Heard Mr.M.S.Naik-Advocate @ Mr.U.B.Wavikar-Advocate for the appellant. Respondent in person. Appeal has been filed against the order dated 29/8/2007 passed in Misc.application no.77/2003 in Complaint no.822/1998. By the order dated 29/8/2007, warrant has been issued against the non-applicant in execution proceedings. What is pertinent to note is the fact that this order of issuance of warrant has been impugned by filing this appeal. The main judgement and award passed in complaint no.822/1998 on 18/2/2003 has not been challenged at all. When original award has not been challenged, the appellant was expected to comply the order and should not have driven the respondent herein to file execution proceeding. Since order was not complied with, complainant was required to file Misc.application no.77/2003 for execution and in the execution proceeding, simple order of issuance of warrant has been passed, since the order o...
Life Insurance Corporation of India, Tah-dist-solapur Vs. Smt.Shobha G ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-2009
Oral Order: Per Mr. P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1) This is an appeal filed by the L.I.C. of India against the judgment and award passed by the District Consumer Forum Solapur in Consumer Complaint No.121/2003 decided on 23/2/2004 whereby while allowing the complaint, the Forum below directed appellant/Org.O.P. to pay assured sum of Rs.35,000/- of the policy to the complainant with interest at the rate of 9% with effect from 14/2/2001 till its actual realization and also to pay cost of Rs.500/-. 2) Facts to the extent material may be stated as under. 3) The complainants husband Mr.Gautam Gawali, had purchased insurance policy from L.I.C. on 19/7/1994 having policy No.851581433. The premium payable was quarterly and amount of premium was Rs.582/-. From time to time quarterly premium was paid by the husband of the complainant and if there has been delay the extra charge was also paid. However, in July-1995, her husband was suffering from serious illness. Hence, fro...
President, the Solapur District Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Tah ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-2009
Oral Order: Per Mr. P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1) This is an appeal filed by the District Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Solapur against the judgment and award passed by District Consumer Forum, Solapur in Consumer Complaint No.145/1995 decided on 28/1/1998 whereby, while allowing the complaint, the Forum below directed O.P.No.4 General Manager of District Central Co-operative Bank, Killa Branch to pay to the complainant the sum towards fix deposit receipts dated 11/2/1991 with interest at the rate of 18% per annum and also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- towards mental harassment and Rs.500/- towards cost, the Org.O.P.No.4 has filed this appeal. 2) Facts to the extent material may be stated as under : 3) The complainant had filed consumer complaint against Chairman and General Manger, District Central Co-operative Bank, Killa Branch and also impleaded Commissioner of Co-operation and District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Society Solapur. It was the case of th...
M/S. Ganashree Developers, Bhandup (W), Mumbai Vs. Shri Anil Narayan J ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-01-2009
Oral Order: Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member Heard Mr. M.S. Naik-Advocate @ Mr. U.B. Wavikar-Advocate for the appellant. Mr. V.S. Paradkar-Advocate for the Respondent. There is delay of 121 days in filing this appeal. Therefore appellant has filed condonation of delay application and also medical certificates covering the period of delay, but no prescription is placed on record to show that the appellant was taking some medicines and tablets and was being constantly monitored by Dr. Manik Tiwari and Dr. Atul K. Agrawal. If he was seriously ill, he should have been admitted in the hospital and should have been under the care of Orthopedic surgeon being an indoor patient. No such thing has happened. So these two certificates appear to be bogus. They are filed just to cover the period of 121 days delay in filing the appeal. We are not satisfied with the genuineness of the ailment of the appellant, who is making capital of it. We are therefore not inclined to cond...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›