Mumbai Court September 2009 Judgments

United India Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai Vs. Shri M.P.Thakur

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order: Per Mr. P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1) This is an appeal filed by the original O.P./United India Insurance Company Limited against the judgment and award passed by the South Mumbai District Consumer Forum dated 15/1/2009 whereby while allowing the complaint, the Forum below directed the insurance company to pay Rs.1,19,302.50/- to the complainant with interest at the rate of 9% per annum and Rs.20,000/- towards compensation and cost. 2) Facts to the extent material may be stated as under: 3) Respondent/complainant herein had filed consumer complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of O.P./insurance company since his mediclaim was repudiated by the insurance company illegally and wrongly. The complainant pleaded that he was continuously purchasing mediclaim policy from O.P. since 15/2/1994 except for a break of 13 days between 15/2/2000 to 27/2/2000. The complainant had suffered chest pain on 7/5/1998 and again on 23/12/1998 for which he wa...

M/S. P.K. Shah and Son’s Through Its Proprietor/Partner Shri Prav ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order: Per Mr. S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member This appeal arises out of order/award dated 16/4/1999 passed in consumer complaint no.235/1998 Shri Shivaji Murlidhar Palkhede V/s. M/s.P.K.Shah and Sons by District Consumer Forum, Nasik. Complaint was partly allowed directing to replace the electric motor pump or to pay compensation of Rs.6000/- and, in addition to that, further awarded compensation of Rs.3000/-. Feeling aggrieved by the said award, original O.P. preferred this appeal. It is a case of respondent /original complainant Shri Shivaji M.Palkhede that he had purchased electric motor pump for Rs.6000/- on 24/6/1997 from appellant/original O.P. After 6 months of its purchase, there was some problem. Appellant replaced the said electric motor pump on 3/3/1998. When again said replaced electric motor pump developed problem, appellant refused to replace the same and therefore, claimed that he had suffered a loss of Rs.50,000/- towards the agriculture. This cons...

New India Assurance Company Limited, Through Divisional Manager, Pune ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order: Per Mr. P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1) This is an appeal by the original O.P./New India Assurance Company Limited, Pune against the judgment and award passed by District Consumer Forum, Pune in Consumer Complaint No.38/2005 decided on 29/8/2008. While allowing the complaint, the Forum below directed original O.P./insurance company to pay to the complainant Rs.1,36,215/- together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 19/8/2004 till realization thereof. 2) Facts to the extent material may be stated as under 3) Complainant Smt. Sunita Dashrash Shindes son Vijay Shinde was owner of vehicle No.MH-12-TC-146/A. Said vehicle was insured with O.P./insurance company from 7/11/2003 to 6/11/2004. The premium amount was already paid by the complainant which included personal accident cover to the driver/owner of Rs.1 Lakh. Complainants son met with an accident on 23/11/2003. He was driving the vehicle with his friend Yogesh Kadam and they were going from...

Shri Shankar Muddanna Shetty Vs. Dean, K.E.M. Hospital of Municipal Co ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Mr. P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1) The complainant Shri Shankar M.Shetty, R/o Jawahar Nagar, Khar(East), Mumbai has filed this complaint of medical negligence against the Dean of K.E.M. Hospital of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, Parel and also against Dr.A.N.Supe attachted to K.E.M. Hospital itself. 2) Case of the complainant in short may be stated as under 3) Complainant had sustained a shoe bite injury to his left leg thumb on 7/2/1997. It was giving some pain on the following day. Hence, he approached his family doctor, Dr.Bhagwan Singh on 8/2/1997. Dr.Bhagwan Singh prescribed some ointment and tablets which complainant took. The injury however did not heal up and pain was increasing. On 16/2/1997, his family doctors diagnosed that gangrene was setting in, in the injury he has sustained on left leg thumb. Hence, he was referred to K.E.M.Hospital, Parel. On 17/2/1997, he approached K.E.M.Hospital and after preliminary tests he was admitted in War...

The Cosmos Co-operative Bank Through Its Assistant General Manager, Pu ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1. Being aggrieved by the judgement and award passed by Additional District Consumer Forum, Pune in consumer complaint no.143/2007, decided on 19/11/2008, whereby while allowing the complaint partly, Forum below directed Cosmos Co-operative Bank to return the original documents to the complainant in respect of flat no.14, 3rd floor, A type building, Premlok park, Chinchwad, Pune, within six weeks and also directed Cosmos Co-operative Bank to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs.10,000/-withn six weeks and to pay cost of Rs.2000/-, the original O.Ps Cosmos Co-operative Bank and its Branch Manager has filed this appeal challenging the said award. Facts to the extent material may be stated as under:- 2. Complainant - Lt.Col.T.N.Mahajan had filed consumer complaint against Cosmos Co-operative Bank for getting original documents in respect of flat no.14 on which he had taken loan. He pleaded in his complaint that he had taken lo...

The State of Maharashtra Through Govt. Pleader, Vs. Shri Rambhau Bansi ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2010(1)BomCR443; 2009(111)BomLR4159

S.S. Shinde, J.1. This Writ Petition is filed challenging the Judgment and Order dated 5/2/1999 passed by the Labour Court, Dhule in Complaint (ULP) No. 20 of 1993 and the Judgment and Order dated 29/11/2001 passed by the Industrial Court, Jalgaon in Revision Application (ULP) No. 717 of 1999 and 849 of 1999.2. The background facts of the case are as under:It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent was appointed under the scheme known as ' Jalawu Sarpan Yojana '. The said scheme was being implemented through petitioner Nos. 2 to 4. That the services of the respondent were terminated after paying him amount equal to 3 month's salary w.e.f. 28/2/1991. The respondent herein being aggrieved by the termination, approached to the Labour Court Dhule and filed Complaint (ULP) No. 20 of 1992 alleging unfair labour practice against the petitioners under Item (1) of Schedule IV of M.R.T.U. and P.U.L.P. Act, 1971 (for short ' the Act ' ). The respondent further prayed for retrenchment ...

S.J. Shah and Sons, a Firm Carrying on Business Vs. the United India I ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Mr. P.N. Kashalkar, Honble Presiding Judicial Member 1) This complaint has been filed by the complainant firm alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of O.P./United India Insurance Company Limited. According to the complainant the firm is carrying on business in the name of S.J.Shah and Sons at Masjid Bundar Road, Mumbai. To protect its stock and cash, the complainant used to obtain insurance policy from O.P. since last several years. The complainant purchased policy bearing No.020900/46/03/16/0439 by paying requisite premium. When policy was in force, on 2/3/1998 there was theft of stock worth Rs.4,41,000/-. Hence, the complainant lodged report with the police. The claim was preferred with the insurance company. The O.P./insurance company appointed M/s.P.P.Dalal and Company as Surveyor. The Surveyor informed the insurance company that they had not received documents from the complainant firm and therefore it had not assessed the loss. As per Sec.64 UM...

The Manager M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd., Andheri ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Per Mrs. S.P. Lale, Honble Member This appeal is directed against the order dated 18/08/2008 passed in consumer complaint No.311/2007 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Thane whereby the Forum below directed original Opposite Party to settle the claim of the complainant and to pay Rs.2,62,050/- together with interest @ 9% p.a. from 12/11/2006 till its realization to the complainant. Forum below further directed the O.P. to pay Rs.3,000/- towards cost of the complaint. Being aggrieved by the said order, O.P. has filed this appeal. The case of the complainant in the Forum below is that he had obtained Burglary and Housebreaking Insurance Policy bearing No.PBG 0004218-000-00 from O.P. Said policy was effective from 26/08/2006 to 25/08/2007. According to the complainant after the Dasera festival, on next day i.e. on 03/10/2006 the employee of complainant, found about 24 bags of yarn, each bag containing 60 Kg. found stolen. It was a case of burglary and breaking house tre...

Mr. Ramakant G. Gawas Vs. Cidco, Cidco Bhavan, New Mumbai

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Oral Order:- Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member. Complainant, who is a prospective buyer of a flat in the area of New Mumbai from CIDCO, had registered himself under the scheme, Demand Registration Survey in Seven Township in New Mumbai in 1987. At that time he registered himself for a flat having area of about 70 Sq. mts. and according to him indicative price was of Rs.2,25,000/-. He had paid accordingly Rs.7,500/- on 17.07.1987 as registration charges under the scheme. Thereafter as per letter dated 20.01.1990, CIDCO asked him to comply requirement as to certain documentation, particularly, about domicile certificate to consider eligibility under residential scheme Priority-III. Even before the scheme was finalized, by letter dated 07.07.1992, CIDCO communicated to the Complainant about the progress in the scheme and it is specifically mentioned therein that the price of the house under the scheme will be as determined at the time of issue of final allotment l...

Shree Ram Urban Infrastructure Limited Vs. Shri R.K. Dhall and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2010]153CompCas152(Bom); [2009]95SCL86(Bom)

S.J. Kathawalla, J.1 Heard Counsel for the parties. The learned Counsel appearing for the respective contesting respondents waive service. As a short question is involved, the appeal is admitted and finally disposed of. 2. By this appeal the appellant have impugned the judgment and order passed by the Company Law Board dated 27th July, 2009 in Company Application No. 138 of 2009 in Company Petition No. 45/397-398/CLB/MB/2009. The Company Application No. 138 of 2009 was filed under Regulations 44 and 46 of the Company Law Board Regulations 1991 by the original petitioners (Respondent No. 1 herein) seeking to incorporate certain subsequent events in the company petition by way of amendments. The appellant herein sought a week's time to file their objections. Except for seeking permission to amend the Company Petition no other relief was sought in the said application No. 138 of 2009. However, on an oral application made by the respondent No. 1, the Company Law Board inter alia passed the...