Scdrc Court January 2014 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.
i.C.i.C.i. Lombard, General Insurance Co.Ltd., Through Its Legal Manag ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
S.M. Shembole, Presiding Judicial Member: 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.2.2008 passed by District Consumer Forum Nanded partly allowing consumer complaint No.171/2007 directing appellant/opponent insurance company to pay to the complainant damages at Rs.60,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. with effect from 12.4.2007 and compensation of Rs.5000/- for causing mental agony and Rs.1000/- more towards cost of the proceedings. (For the sake of brevity appellant is hereinafter referred as opponent insurance company and respondent as the complainant) 2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that:- Complainant Shri.Hanumant Tamloorkar is owner of Mahindra Scorpio Jeep bearing registration No.MH-26/L-2046. It was insured with opponent insurance company for the period from 11.11.2006 to 10.11.2007. On 14.3.2007 said insured vehicle met with an accident causing damage. Therefore complainant was required to repair the vehicle by spending amount of Rs.90,017...
Piyal Pallab Sanyal Vs. Bharati Airtel Limited
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
J. Bag, Ld. Member: The present appeal is directed against the Order dated 20.06.12 of the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, North 24-Parganas, in CC No. 247/2011 whereby the complaint was dismissed on contest on the question of maintainability. The complaint case, in brief, was as follows: The Complainant,an Internet Broadband Connection user since 1999, got one unlimited connection of the OPs RPS system and was connected by modem device supplied by a franchisee of the OP service provider in October 2007 . Immediately after such connection (Mobile Airtel No. 9903163414) the hackers were found to have been breaking the codes and using the connection to make the user computer a terminal server in the absence of any security provided by OP. The data card was found to be defective. The modem purchased at Rs 5000/- was not functioning . The Complainant, not being able to use the connection for fear of exposure, loss of business , besides suffering anxiety and agony. The ...
indusind Bank Limited Vs. Zaffar Mahmood
Court: Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Dehradun
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
B.C. Kandpal, President: 1. This is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 25.05.2010 passed by the District Forum, Haridwar in consumer complaint No. 237 of 2008, whereby the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint against the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 and directed them to waive off the demand of Rs.2,32,528/- made by them from the complainant and not to initiate any proceedings from recovering any amount from the complainant. The District Forum has further directed the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 to pay litigation expenses of Rs.2,500/- to the complainant. However, the learned President of the District Forum vide dissenting order of the same date, has dismissed the consumer complaint. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as mentioned in the consumer complaint, are that the complainant purchased a vehicle (Tata Spacio) from opposite party No. 1 “ Oberai Motors, P.O. Majra, Saharanpur Road, Dehradun on 18.08.2003 fo...
Junior Engineer and Another Vs. Vishwanath
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Nagpur
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
Jayshree Yengal, Member: 1. This appeal challenges the order dated 21/01/2002 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Yavatmal partly allowing the consumer complaint bearing No. 314/2001 thereby directing the respondent Nos.1and2/ appellants herein to issue a corrected electricity bill and to adjust Rs., 1680/- in the said bill, granting compensation of Rs. 1000/- towards mental and physical harassment and Rs. 500/- more towards cost of the proceeding.The appellants to be referred as opposite party and respondent No.1 be referred as complainant for the sake of brevity.2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that:-œComplainant -Vishwanath is a consumer of the opposite party and has electricity connection bearing DL No. 307. The complainant was regularly paying the bills issued by the opposite party towards electricity consumption. The opposite party issued bill for the period from 01/03/2001 to 28/05/2001 for a sum of Rs. 2390/-. The said bill reflected an outstanding amount ...
Rajesh Bansilal Bhandari Vs. the Branch Manager, State Bank of India
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
K.B. Gawali, Member: 1. This appeal is preferred by the original complainant against the judgment and order dated 30.04.2008 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Dhule in consumer complaint no.507/2007, whereby complaint is dismissed. The respondent is the original opponent. For the sake of brevity the appellant is hereinafter referred as the œcomplainant? and the respondent as the œopponent bank?. 2. The facts of this case in a nutshell are that, the complainant is a head of the joint family and is a farmer having land from Gut No.365/1, 325/2, and 364 from Bhatpure Tq. Shirpur which are owned by his family members. It was submitted that the opponent bank had launched a scheme of œKisan Gold Card? for the benefit of the farmers. As per this scheme the amount of loan credit was being given to the farmers as per his requirement. That, the complainant therefore had filed application for getting this Kisan Gold Card. Accordingly after completing all formalities the opp...
The Post Master and Another Vs. Uma Chowdhury
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
Debasis Bhattacharya, Member: This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 04.10.12 in Case No. 251/2010 passed by the Ld. District Forum, South 24 Parganas. By the impugned judgment, the Ld. District Forum has decreed (sic) on contest with cost of s. 5,000/- in favour of the Complainant and directed the OPs to pay Rs. 20,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony with cost within one month from the date of the order, failing which the entire amounts will carry an interest @ 10 % p.a. from the date of default till realization. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same, the OPs thereof have preferred this appeal. The case of the Complainant/Respondent is that she returned the documents in connection with eh enhancement pack to the Manager, Dinning Plus, Standard Chartered Bank, 909, Raheja Centre, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400 021 by registered post with A/D from Alipoe Head Post Office, under no. RLAD B 3227 dated 01.07.2010. But the OPs have failed and neglected ...
President, Swami Vivekanand Institute of Engineering and Technology an ...
Court: Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chandigarh
Decided on: Jan-28-2014
(Order) Gurcharan Singh Saran, Presiding Judicial Member: 1. The appellants/opposite parties(hereinafter called œthe OPs?) have filed the present appeal against the order dated 24.2.2012 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Barnala (hereinafter called œthe District Forum?) in consumer complaint No.368 dated 19.10.2011 vide which the complaint filed by the complainant was allowed with the direction to the opposite parties to refund a sum of Rs. 44,980/- after deducting Rs. 1,000/- from the total amount alongwith interest @ 9% within 30 days and pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/-. 2. The complaint was filed by the complainant(hereinafter called œthe complainant?) against the opposite parties on the allegations that the complainant participated in counselling conducted by Punjab Technical University (PTU) for admission in B.Tech. (Lect.) 2011 and provisional allotment letter No. 954478 dated 30.8.2011 was allotted to him to get admission with OP No. 1 ...
M/S. Vivek Constructions Corporation, Represented by Sri Balmukund Gup ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2014
Oral Order: (S. Bhujanga Rao, Member) This appeal is directed against the order dt.08.05.2012 of the District Forum-II, Hyderabad made in C.C.No.760/2011. The appellants are the opp.parties and the respondent is the complainant in C.C.No.760/2011. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as arrayed in the complaint. The brief case of the complainant as set out in the complaint is as follows: The complainant purchased the flat no.4-1-826/34 from the opp. parties and the son of the opp.party no.2, admeasuring 1210 sq.ft. in the III floor of Victoria Chambers, situated at J.N.Road, Abids, Hyderabad together with 44 sq. yards of open area adjacent to the flat, the undivided share of 34 sq.yards in the land proportionate undivided share in the common areas and amenities, under the sale deed dt.24.01.1990 registered as the document no.376/1990 in the office of the Registrar, Hyderabad. At the time of executing the said sale deed, the opposite parties and the son of the opposite...
Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Vs. P.K. Shaji
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Jan-27-2014
P.Q. Barkath Ali : President This is an appeal filed by the opposite party in CC 385/2007 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thrissur challenging the order of the Forum dated August 3, 2012 directing the opposite party to pay Rs.18,000/- being the insurance claim of the complaint regarding the motor cycle which was stolen and a cost of Rs.750/-. 2. The case of the respondent/complainant as testified by him as PW1 and as detailed in the complaint before the Forum in brief is this:- Complainant is the registered owner of the motor cycle bearing registration No.KL8 K7930. On 07/04/2004 the motor cycle was stolen by somebody. The police registered a case in respected this incident and filed a final report before the Judicial First Class Magistrate who closed the file. The claim submitted by the complainant was repudiated by the Insurance company as the complainant did not produce the required documents. Therefore the complainant filed OP 318/05 before the Forum claiming the ...
Cherukuri Kranthi Vs. M/S. Reliance General Insurance Co., Ltd., Rep., ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2014
T. Ashok Kumar, Member This is an appeal preferred by the complainant against the order in C.C.No.175/2012 dated 12-4-2013 on the file of District Forum-II, Vijayawada. For convenience sake the parties as arrayed in the complaint are referred to hereunder: The gist of the complaint is that the complainantshusband hired the vehicle bearing No.AP 16 AT 2345 from one M.Koteswara Rao and on 24.10.2010 when he was returning from Hyderabad by driving, the vehicle met with an accident at N.H.9 at 2.00 a.m. and he sustained grievous injuries and died. The Ibrahimpatnam police registered a case in Crime No.422 of 2010 under section 304(A) IPC. The hired vehicle was insured with the opposite party for the period from 15.4.2010 to 14.4.2011 and the policy covers own damages, basic C.C., compulsory PA cover to driver PA to unnamed passenger, LLP to paid driver, cleaner and conductor and in case the driver died due to accident the opposite party is liable to pay 2 lakhs to his legal heir. Therefore...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »