Mumbai Court May 2009 Judgments

Mr. Vishwanath Gangadhar Patankar, Miraj and Another Vs. Avadhoot Gas ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member These two appeals are directed against the impugned order/award dated 16/08/2008 passed in consumer complaint No.250/2008 Vishwanath G. Patankar V/s. Avdhoot Gas Agency and another by District Consumer Forum Sangli (in short Forum below). Org. complainant-Vishwanath G. Patankar (appellant in A-1256/2008 and respondent No.1 in Appeal No.1257/2008 is a consumer of B.P.C.L. supplying L.P.Gas and his consumer Number is 17358. Org. O.P.No.1-Avdhoot Gas Agency (appellant in Appeal No.1257/2008 and respondent No.1 in Appeal No.1256/2008) is one of the dealer to supply LPG gas of B.P.C.L. O.P.No.2-Collector, Sangli (respondent No.2 in both the appeals) is the revenue head and controlling authority as per Essential Commodities Act 1955, L.P.G. [Regulation Supply and Distribution] Order 2000 for revenue district Sangli, Maharashtra State. It is the grievance of complainant-Vishwanath Patankar that O.P.No.1-Avdhoot Gas Agency do not registe...

Bank of Baroda, Princess Street Branch, Mumbai Vs. Mr. Sunil Chnrakant ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Smt. S.P. Lale, Honble Member This appeal filed by opposite party/Bank of Baroda is directed against the order dated 13/08/1998 passed by Additional District Forum, Mumbai City (South Mumbai) in consumer complaint no.525/95(161/97), whereby the Forum below directed opp.party to pay to the complainant Rs.1lakh together with interest @15% p.a. from 01/06/1991 till realisation and Rs.1,000/- towards cost to the complainant. Being aggrieved by the said order, the org.opp.party has filed this appeal. It was the case of the complainant in the Forum below that the complainant had saving bank account with opposite party vide account no. 3388 since 07/08/1972. On 19/06/1991, the complainant noticed that his account was debited by a sum of Rs.1lakh. On inquiry he learnt that the opposite party had paid Rs.1lakh across the counter against the cheque bearing no.125828 from the complainants account. According to complainant, he did not sign any cheque for the said amount. After inquiry from th...

Smt. Kamal Parwar Vs. Mr. Timotio Fernandes and Village Panchayat of M ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(4)BomCR163

F.M. Reis, J.1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of the parties.2. The present petition challenges the order passed by the learned District Judge-II, Panaji in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 138/2008 whereby the appeal preferred by the respondent No. 1, was allowed. The learned District Judge has passed impugned order essentially on the ground that the rights of the petitioner, have not yet been crystallized before the authorities under the Mundkar Act, where the applications for declaration of their rights of mundkarship are pending. The learned Judge came to the conclusion that the petitioner was not entitled for any relief of injunction against the respondents unless and until the area of the dwelling house as claimed by the petitioners, has not been demarcated under the provisions of the Mundkar Act. The learned District Judge has further held that in any event, no prejudice would cause to the petitioner as the distance from the proposed new construction carried out by ...

M/S. Darshan Industrial Roadways, Mumbai and M/S. Dashmesh Roadlines, ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Smt. S.P. Lale, Honble Member This appeal filed by appellant/org. complainant for enhancement of compensation against the order dated 13/11/2007 passed by Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Forum, whereby the Forum below directed the O.P. to cooperate with the complainant to get certified copy of Agreement for Sale, which is lost by them or to pay Rs.3,000/- towards compensation. The Forum below further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and Rs.2,000/- towards cost to the complainant. Dissatisfied by the said award, org. complainant himself has filed this appeal. The facts given rise to this appeal are as under :- The complainant had purchased a flat situated at Kolbad Road, Thane Plot No.31 from one Mr.S. Ekambaram and an Agreement for Sale dated 18/01/2001 was executed between the parties. The total cost of the flat was Rs.6 Lakhs. Out of which Rs.11,000/- was paid by the complainant and he decided to pay balance amount of Rs.5,89,000/- by obtainin...

Mr. Cajetan Dennis Estibeiro, Kandivali (W), Mumbai and Others Vs. M/S ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member Being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Forum in consumer complaint No.87/2007 decided on 07/12/2007 whereby the Forum below partly allowed the complaint and directed the O.P.Nos.1and2/builders to pay to the complainant Rs.3,68,000/- plus Rs.54,000/- and also directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- and cost of Rs.1,000/-, org. complainant has filed Appeal No.89/2008 and org. O.P.Nos.1and2/builders have filed Appeal No.260/2008. By this common judgment, we are disposing of both these appeals. There is delay of 7 days in filing Appeal No.89/2008. Therefore, application is filed by the appellant/org. complainant. Delay is of few days. Delay is not intentional or deliberate. We are therefore inclined to condone the delay. Accordingly, delay is condoned. The facts to the extent material may be stated as under :- The complainant had filed consumer complaint alleging deficiency in servi...

Lt. Cdr (Retd.) Hakim Singh Naurata Singh Navi Mumbai Vs. Senior Manag ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member Being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by Addl. District Consumer Forum Thane in consumer complaint No.121/2007 decided on 15/03/2008, whereby by allowing complaint, Forum below was pleased to direct org. O.Ps./Canara Bank to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.1,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as cost and directed to pay interest @12% p.a. on Rs.2,000/- in case same is not paid within 45 days from the date of order, org. complainant himself has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation. The facts to the extent material may be stated as under:- According to the complainant, he was having Saving Bank Account No.2379 in the Canara Bank. On 07/12/2005 he received a letter from Canara Bank that he had taken loan on Fixed Deport Receipt No.2851 and this Fixed Deposit Receipt was getting matured on 22/12/2005 and if the loan is not paid, amount payable shall be debited towards loan account. Acco...

M.M. Barve, New Panvel Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member This appeal is directed against the order dated 19/07/2007 passed in consumer complaint No.35/2007 M.M. Barve V/s. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. decided by District Consumer Forum Raigad (in short Forum below). Consumer complaint was filed by the complainant alleging that energy connection, which stood in the name of Neeta M. Parvate was not changed in his name though application was given. Energy bills were given not as per actual consumption and the power cable giving energy connection to their building was left open after damaged cable was changed due to flood water. Forum below found that all the alleged deficiencies were met by the respondent/O.P. but there is delay in fulfilling the same and therefore, it awarded compensation of Rs.3,000/-. Unsatisfied thereby, org. complainant has preferred this appeal. As it appears, org. O.P. did not file any appeal. We heard appellant/org. complainant Mr.M.M. Barv...

The Manager, Bank of India, Satavali Branch, Satavali Vs. Shri Subhash ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member Being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by District Forum, Ratnagiri in consumer complaint no.07/2008 decided on 09/05/2008, whereby while allowing the complaint the Forum below directed the Bank of India, Branch Satvali to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.2,61,630.85 with interest @9% p.a. from 30/11/2007 and also directed to pay Rs.3,000/- for mental agony and costs, the Bank of India has filed this appeal. Facts of the case in brief are as under: The complainant-Shri Subhashchandra Jayaram Potkar had filed consumer complaint in the Forum below. He pleaded in his complaint that he had deposited for 84 months an amount of Rs.70,000/- in fixed deposit receipt under double benefit scheme on 07/07/2001. After 84 months he was to get an amount of Rs.1,35,058/- as maturity value. Thereafter, he had further deposited another amount of Rs.1,13,339/- on 10/12/2004 for 75 months and on maturity after 75 months he was to g...

Divisional Manager Life Insurance Corpn. of India Vs. Smt. Laxmi Ashok ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member Being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by District Consumer Forum Satara in consumer complaint No.32/2001 dated 30/08/2001, whereby allowing complaint of the complainant, Forum below directed the O.P./LIC to pay to the complainant claim amount under both the policies with all benefits within 30 days from the date of the order and further directed to pay interest @ 9% p.a. from 21/04/1999 till realization of the said amount and also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental harassment and Rs.2,000/- towards cost, the org. O.P./LIC has filed this appeal. The facts to the extent material may be stated as under :- Husband of complainant Ashok Ramkrishna Mahajan had taken two insurance policies from LIC bearing No.940427141 and 940426808 dated 28/09/1992 one for amount of Rs.25,000/- and another for amount of Rs.50,000/- with quarterly premium. It was pleaded by the complainant in the complaint that her husban...

Shri Pushkar Prakash Deo, Kothrud, Pune Vs. Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd., ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member This appeal arises out of order/award dated 21/02/2007 passed in consumer complaint No.377/2003 Shri Pushkar Prakash Deo V/s. Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd. by District Consumer Forum Pune (in short Forum below). Appellant/complainant Shri Pushkar Deo dealing in computer printing machinery. He has given loan/cash credit facility by respondent No.1-Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd. (Bank in short). Stock in trade was hypothecated for the purpose of said liability under loan/cash credit facility. The goods were insured with respondent/O.P.No.2-United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (Insurance Company in short). The period of the insurance cover got expired and thereafter the policy was renewed but with effect from 17/02/2000 for the period of one year. However, before its renewal with effect from 17/02/2000, there was an event witnessing failure of computer equipment. Insurance claim was made with respondent/Insurance Company. Amount of Rs.7,000/- wh...