Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Incharge President) 1. The complaint is filed u/s 17 (1)(a)(i) of C.P.Act claiming a sum of Rs.52,71,000/- towards damages and business loss from the date of expiry of agreement with APSRTC and interest thereon. 2. The averments of the complaint are that the complainant let on hire his bus bearing registration No. AP 26W 2449 to APSRTC and he obtained insurance policy from the opposite party insurance company vide policy bearing No.151204/31/04/06243 on 27.2.2005 and he got renewed the policy for the period from 27.2.2005 to 26.2.2006. The bus involved in an accident on 28.2.2005 causing death of two persons on account of which a petition seeking for compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- was filed before MACT which awarded a sum of Rs.3,90,000/- and Rs.3,87,000/- on 5.2.2008. 3. The complainant submitted that the opposite party has to pay compensation to the victims who filed the claim petition and it has attempted to shrug of its liability to pay the amou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Incharge President The opposite party is the appellant. The complaint is filed for a direction to the appellant to execute and register sale deed in favour of the respondent in respect of site in Kanakamahalakshmi Real Estate and Constructions, Srikakulam and pay Rs.30,000/- towards mental agony and costs of Rs.2,000/-. The respondent a minor represented by his father intended to purchase a plot in Kanakamahalakshmi Real Estate and Constructions, Srikakulam and the appellant executed agreement in favour of the respondent for allotment of plot to an extent of 36 x 60 in the layout at the rate of Rs.350/-per instalment and collected the instalments from the parents of the respondent. The respondent submitted that the appellant executed an agreement on 01-7-1994 in favour of the respondent and thereafter the parents of the respondent requested the appellant to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the respondent. The respondent submitted that the appellant i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Incharge President The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. The complaint is filed by the appellant for a direction to the respondent to return the amounts paid by him amounting to Rs.5,00,000/- together with interest and compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- and costs. The appellant submitted that the respondent is doing business of selling garments and textiles and also business in real estate under the name and style of S.V.Group and R.S.Brothers Projects. The appellant submitted that he approached the respondent for purchase of north facing flat No.229 of Venkadri in II block and paid Rs.5,00,000/- towards sale consideration. The appellant submitted that the respondent has to complete the construction and hand over possession of the allotted flat No.229, which is east facing and as the flat is not having vastu norms, the appellant dropped the idea of purchasing the flat and requested the respondent to return the sale consideration of Rs.5,00,000/-. The appell...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Incharge President The opposite parties are the appellants. The complaint is filed by the respondent for a direction to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards the medical expenses incurred by the complainant and to pay Rs.13,50,000/- towards negligence, damages and costs. The case of the respondent is that she visited the 2nd appellant hospital on 11-11-2010 as she was running fever with chills, vomiting and headache. The first appellant examined the respondent and advised her to admit in the second appellant hospital. The appellant hospital technicians collected blood sample for CBP, Widal and MP Strip test and as per the reports, typhoid and malaria were found negative. The first appellant administered Falcigo Inj. Mgnex Inj. Amikacin Inj, Quinine Inj. Pantacid Inj. Zofer Inj. And Calpol tablets, the temperature came down. The respondent had sudden loss of vision and there was no improvement. The respondent submitted that the first appella...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Incharge President The opposite parties 2 and 3 are the appellants. The complaint is filed for direction to the opposite parties 1 to 4 to restore the mobile connection of the respondent without collecting any charges, to pay a sum of Rs.45,000/- towards actual loss sustained by the complainant, to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation, a sum of Rs.500/- towards notice charges and Rs.2,000/- towards costs. The case of the respondent is that being a technician, he purchased a Reliance Cellular phone Model No.LG-RD2030 in the month of August, 2003 under postpaid connecting by paying an amount of Rs.10,500/- and the appellants allotted mobile connection number 08671-310935 and the postpaid connection was converted to prepaid category with lifetime validity and he was allotted number 93478000095. The respondent submitted that on 28-5-2011, the appellants without prior intimation, disconnected the cellular phone connection and he incurred loss in his business and los...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Thotta Ashok Kumar, Honble Member 1. Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.215/2009 on the file of District Forum-II, Hyderabad, the complainant, viz. G.R. Subba Reddy, shown as such in the complaint preferred this appeal. 2. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the sales executive of the opposite party approached the complainant, Viz. G. R. Subba Reddy and canvassed about the project Chalapathi Fortune City near Shamsabad showed the layout plan and induced the complainant to make investment. Accordingly, the complainant induced by the same booked 7 plots in the name of his family members and pass book Nos. 438 to 441 and 1509 to 1511 were issued and he and paid a sum of Rs.25,000/- each for the said plots through cheque Nos.862182 dated 29-9-2005 for Rs.1,02,000/- and cheque Nos.981 796 and 981797 dated 14-11-2005 for balance amounts and plots Nos.850, 842 and 852 of 400 sq. yds. and 533 sq. yds. were allotted respectively. 3. The complainant submitted that he could not mak...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Incharge President) 1. The opposite party is the appellant. The respondent purchased plot bearing number 31 At site C in Flight City floated by the appellant company at Maheshwaram village and Mandal in Ranga Reddi district for consideration of Rs.10,44,700/- to the appellant and the appellant executed sale deed in favour of the respondent on 18.11.2006. The title over the property was conveyed in favour of the respondent. The respondent submitted that the sale consideration of the plot was mentioned in the sale deed as Rs.2,36,900/- as against the actual cost of the plot which is Rs.10,44,700/-. 2. The respondent submitted that the appellant had handed over the sale deed and failed to hand over copy of HUDA/DTCP approved lay out and he paid personal visits to the branch office of the appellant company and thereafter he addressed letters dated 15.11.2012 and 1.12.2012 and notice dated 26.12.2012 with a request to furnish copy of HUDA approved layou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Incharge President) 1. The respondents husband, Rajeshwer during his life time obtained life insurance policy bearing number 685202523 from the appellant-insurance corporation for sum assured of Rs.3,00,000/-, for a period of 16 years with the commencement of the policy on 28.03.2009 and the maturity date 28.03.2025. The terms of the insurance policy provide for payment of sum assured and bonus etc. The respondents husband died on 12.08.2009 - leaving behind him the respondent as legal heir and she is also the nominee of the insured for the purpose of the sum assured under the insurance policy. After the death of their husband , the respondent submitted claim and the appellant-corporation has repudiated the claim on 18.11.2009. The respondent claimed repudiation of her claim arbitrary and unjustifiable. 2. The appellant insurance corporation resisted the claim contending that as per the death certificate, the date of death of the life assured was 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Incharge President 1. The complainant is an employee of M/s Vijaya Spinning Mills Ltd, a public limited company at ganguru near Vijayawada. On 29.09.21998 the complainant approached ESI hospital at Ganguru for treatment of fever and he was referred to ESI hospital, Gunadala, Vijayawada where he was treated as inpatient and later he was referred to Dr.P.Ramesh, cardiologist, Vijayawada and he advised the complainant to approach NIMS, Hyderabad. The labour welfare officer of M/s Vijaya Spinning Mills Ltd accompanied the complainant and the superintendent of ESI hospital, Vijayawada issued referral letter to NIMS. 2. The complainant was referred to Apollo Hospital on 7.10.1998 where he was treated by cardio-thoracic and vascular surgeon. The complainant was diagnosed with suffering from 1.post injection thrombo -embolism and gangrene of RD 3,4 and 5 and right thumb apart from 2.scrotal abscess and 3.Neurogenic bladder. After stabilization of gangrene,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Incharge President) 1. The complainant is the appellant. The appellant purchased the vehicle AP07 TL T/R 4010 and insured the vehicle with the respondent. The respondent issued policy bearing No.71077769 and it was valid from 04.03.2010 to03.03.2011. The appellant on 04.06.2010 entrusted the vehicle to his friend Duggireddy Srinivasa Reddy to go on pilgrimage along with his family members. One Vankayala Murali Mohan Rao was driver of the vehicle. While returning on 07.10.2010 at about 3.15 a.m. in between Ganganapalem-Kovvuru on Chilakaluripet-Narasaraopet road Volvo bus bearing No.AP27W 9009 hit the car belonging to the appellant as a result of which Duggireddy Srinivasa Reddy, Vankayala Murali Mohan Rao and Duggireddy Gayathri were died. In the collision the car got totally damaged. The accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the Volvo bus driver. The insurance policy was in force at the time of accident. The appellant got estimate...
Tag this Judgment!