Scdrc Court March 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.
Vandana Global Limited Vs. M/S. Jaypee Engg. and Hydraulics Equipment ...
Court: Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Raipur
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
R.S. Sharma, President: 1. The complainant has filed this complaint under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite parties for seeking direction to the opposite parties (a) to take back the defected goods and return the amount paid for the purchase of the defective product i.e. Rs.25,90,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Lakhs and Ninety Thousand Only); (b) to pay interest @ 24% p.a. on the above amount from the date of occurrence of defect in product; (c) to pay compensation amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rs. Ten Lakhs only) towards mental and physical agony and financial loss; (d) Saddle the cost of litigation expenses, lawyers fees on the opposite parties for instituting the instant complaint and approaching before this Commission and (e) to grant any other relief, which this Commission deems fit and just under the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice. 2. Brief facts of the complaint are that : the complainant is a limited company having its registered off...
Senior Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vazhuthacaud, ...
Court: Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
P.Q. Barkath Ali : President This is an appeal filed by the opposite parties 2 and 3 in OP.141/12 on the file of CDRF, Palakkad under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 challenging the order of the Forum dated, February 12, 2013 directing opposite parties 2 and 3 to pay to the complainant Rs.7.lakhs being the insurance policy amount and a cost of Rs.1000/-. 2. The case of the complainant as detailed in the complaint before the Forum in brief is this:- Complainant is the wife and legal heir of deceased Radhakrishnan. He was a teacher in B.M.A.J.B School , Palakkad. On February 25, 2009 he was admitted in District Hospital, Palakkad due to snake bite. From there he was taken to Jubilee Mission Hospital, Thrissur. He died on 28.02.2009. First opposite party, the State of Kerala is represented by District Collector, Palakkad who introduced an insurance scheme of State Government Employees and Teachers including part time-contingent employees. Deceased Radhakrishnan paid Rs.50/...
M/S. Belwal Spinning Mills Ltd. New Delhi Vs. the Oriental Insurance C ...
Court: Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Dehradun
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
C.C. Pant, Member: 1. This consumer complaint, under Section 12 read with Section 18 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by M/s Belwal Spinning Mills Ltd. having its registered office at 4654/21, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi-2 (hereinafter referred as œcompany/complainant?) against The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. having its Branch Office at Sethi Motor Works Building, Ram Nagar, Kashipur, Uttarakhand (hereinafter referred as œOpposite Party/Insurance Company?) alleging deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. 2. As stated by the complainant in its consumer complaint, the complainant is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It had set up a factory at Kashipur, Ram Nagar Road, District Nainital for manufacturing of sewing thread and cotton yarn and had hired a godown from M/s Kumaon Thread and Rewinders Pvt. Ltd. (in short œKTRPL) for keeping the stock. Since the State Bank of India, Kashipur, District Nainital had provi...
Kesari Haumanth Rao Vs. the Unit Trust of India-trustee Company Pvt. L ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
T. Ashok Kumar, Member 1. This is an appeal preferred by the complainant against the order in C.C.No.947/2011 dated 28-3-2013 on the file of District Forum-I, Hyderabad. For convenience sake the parties as arrayed in the complaint are referred to hereunder: 2. The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant joined the scheme proposed by the opposite parties on 21-5-1999 for medical coverage of `2,50,000/- by purchasing 3000 units at `10/- per unit and was also entitled for cumulative bonus from 1999-2009 and he is eligible for Rs.7,42,247/- towards medical cover. As per the instructions in the logbook, it is mentioned in Cl.No.4 that maximum limit is Rs.1,50,000/- per illness per spouse and any recurrence of any illness within 45 days from the date of discharge from the hospital will be treated as the same illness. On 24-10-2010, the complainant was admitted in Care Hospital for cardiac ailment for 23 days and the doctors advised for implanting stent in the heart and after 2 ...
Life Insurance Corporation of India Through Its Manager (L and Hpf) Vs ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
B.A. Shaikh, Presiding Member: 1. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 15.02.2008 passed in consumer complaint No. CC/07/118 by District Consumer Forum, Bhandara by which, the complaint has been partly allowed. 2. The case of the complainant as set out in the complaint in brief is that her husband Madhav Peshne had obtained insurance policy from the opposite party (for short œthe O.P.?) covering the risk of his life. The sum assured was of Rs.5.00 Lacs. Her husband died on 23.06.2006 due to heart attack. At that time the period of policy was not expired. Therefore, she submitted claim proposal alongwith necessary documents to the O.P. The O.P. repudiated that claim vide letter dated 30.03.2007 on untenable ground that the deceased Madhav had suppressed material facts while submitting policy proposal about his illness and treatment taken by him. Therefore, the complainant claimed from the O.P. Rs.5.00 Lacs towards sum assured, Rs.1.18 Lac towards bonus i.e. total Rs.6....
G. Radha Vs. Dr.Janaki Md. Dgo., (Assistant Professor and Consultant) ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
Oral Order: (GopalaKrishna Tamada, President) The unsuccessful complainant in C.C.No.197/2010 before the District Forum, Ranga Reddy District is the appellant and this appeal is directed against the order dated 02-4-2013 wherein the District Forum dismissed the complaint and refused to order any amount towards compensation. The brief facts that led to filing of the complaint are as under: The complainant, a white ration card holder, was constantly suffering from terrible stomach ache. On 05-3-2009 when the pain became severe, she was taken to Niloufer hospital for treatment. Opposite party no.1, who attended the complainant advised the complainant to visit her at her private clinic for better treatment. After conducting necessary tests, opposite party No.1 informed the complainant that her uterus was damaged and advised to undergo an operation at Chaitanya Clinic where she is a consultant. On 30-6-2009 at about 9.20 a.m. without obtaining the written consent from the husband of the com...
Nirmal Urban Co.Op. Bank Vs. Devakinadan P. Khemani
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Nagpur
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
B.A. Shaikh, Presiding Member: 1. This appeal is preferred against order dated 20.09.2005 passed by Addl. District Forum, Nagpur in consumer complaint bearing No. CC/04/44 by which the complaint has been partly allowed. 2. The case of the complainant as set out in the complaint in brief is that he is a businessman and the opposite party (for short œthe O.P.?) is a co-operative Bank. He opened cash-credit account bearing No.175/01 with the O.P. However, on 10.07.2000 he (complainant) found that Rs.2.5 Lacs have been withdrawn from his said account by some unknown person. He also found that the O.P. issued new cheque book containing blank cheque foils bearing Nos. 019576 to 019600 on 07.07.2000 to an unknown person who forged his (complainant) signature on one of the cheque bearing No.019582 and thereby he has withdrawn Rs.2.5 Lacs from his account. Therefore, he made complaint to the O.P. and also to Reserve Bank of India in this regard. He also lodged report with the Police about...
Reliance General Insurance Company Limited and Another Vs. Raj Kumar
Court: Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated April 4th, 2013, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, (for short District Forum), Panipat, whereby complaint filed by Raj Kumar-complainant (respondent herein) seeking benefits of insurance in respect of medi-claim policy, was accepted in the following terms:- œ.We hereby allowed the present complaint with a direction to opposite parties to pay Rs.5,37,322/- to the complainant with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing the complaint till its realization. Cost of litigation quantified at Rs.2200/- is also allowed to be paid by the opposite parties to the complainant. This order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of announcement of this order.? 2. Raj Kumar-respondent had purchased an insurance policy from Reliance General Insurance Company Limited-opposite parties (appellants herein) under the plan known as œGold Plan?, initially of Rs.3.00 lac for the...
Vishwanath Automobiles and Another Vs. Raghunath Vittal Girnar and Ano ...
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
K.B. Gawali, Member: 1. Both these appeals have been filed against the judgment and order dated 27/03/2008 passed by the Dist. Consumer Forum, Nandurbar in CC. No. 02/2008 whereby complaint of the complainant is allowed and both the appellants have been held liable for deficiency in service. The appellant in appeal No. 451/2008 who is the authorized dealer of the tractor manufactured by appellant No. 2, and the appellant in appeal No. 457/2008 is a manufacturing company of the tractors are the original opponents, whereas and the respondent No. 1 in both the appeals is the original complainant. For better understanding the appellant in appeal No. 451/2008 is hereinafter termed as œ the opponent dealer? whereas the appellant in appeal No. 458/2008 is hereinafter termed as œOpponent manufacturing company? and the respondent No. 1 in both these appeals is hereinafter termed as the œComplainant?. 2. Since the issue involved in both these appeals is the same, we have decide...
Asst. Manager (Legal) Vs. National Insurance Co.Ltd. and Another
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
Narendra Kawde, Member: [1] Complainant is a company incorporated under Companies Act, 1956 and availed Standard Fire and Special Peril Policy to provide insurance cover to the stocks situated at various locations in the country issued by the opponent, National Insurance Co.Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as opponent insurer for the sake of brevity). The validity of the insurance policy commenced from 01/10/2004 to 30/09/2005. The stocks situated in the godown at M/s.Om Enterprises, Mahaveer Godown, Survey No.186 and 187, Thane-Bhiwandi Road, Purna, Dist.Thane, interalia, was covered under the insurance policy against the perils. Claim arising on account of unprecedental rains and consequent flooding that occurred on 26/07/2005 in an around Mumbai and Thane area resulting in damage to the insured stock was repudiated by the opponent insurer as no claim. Aggrieved thereby, present consumer complaint has been filed alleging deficiency of service against the opponent insurer claiming total...
- ‹ Prev
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Next ›
- Last »