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.
C. Premraj Vs. M/S. Indu Eastern Province Projects Private Ltd., (Spv ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Oral Order: (GopalaKrishna Tamada, President) The complainant is the appellant and this appeal is directed against the order of the District Forum, Ranga Reddy District made in C.C.No.82/2010 dated 30-3-2012 whereby the District Forum has come to the conclusion that the complaint is mis-conceived for the reason that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and accordingly dismissed the complaint. For the sake of brevity, the parties will be referred to as they were referred to in the District Forum. The opposite party No.1 is a registered company engaged in real estate business and opposite party No.2 is a bank which finances for purchase of houses/house development. The complainant entered into an agreement of sale on 25-7-2008 to purchase villa No.211 admeasuring 200 sq. yds. in a total built up area of 1840 sq.ft. situated at INDU ARANYA in Sy.No.117, Bandlaguda, Tattiannaram (V), Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and paid an amount of Rs.11,87,00...
Balai Saha Vs. the Regional Manager, State Bank of India and Another
Court: Tripura State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Agartala
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
S. Baidya, J. 1. This appeal under section 15 of the C.P.Act, 1986 filed on 21.06.13 by the appellant/complainant is directed against the judgment dated 23.05.13 passed by the Ld. District Forum, West Tripura, Agartala in C.C-80/11 whereby Ld. District Forum has been pleased to dismiss the complaint without any cost. 2. The case of the complainant as narrated in the memo of appeal, in brief, is that the complainant is a consumer of the SBI having a Savings account bearing No-20044846544 and having an ATM Card allotted to him against the said account of the complainant. The complainant along with his family members went to Kolkata via Guwahati for the purpose of treatment and on 23.06.11 at 8.13 p.m. the complainant withdrew Rs.3,500/- from the ATM counter of SBI, Prince Market UL, Paltan Bazar, Guwahati and on 25.06.11, the complainant withdrew a sum of Rs.2000/- from the ATM counter of ICICI Bank, Kolkata and also received a mini statement wherefrom he came to learn that a sum of Rs.2...
The Divisional Manager Vs. Sumanbai
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Uma S. Bora, Member: 1. National Insurance Company through its Divisional Manger challenges in this appeal judgment and order passed by District Forum, Latur on 30.04.2009 while allowing consumer complaint No.290/2008. 2. Facts in nutshell are as under: Complainant Sumanbai Hanumantrao Salunke resident of Borgaon Tq. Ausa Dist. Latur is wife of Hanumanrao Dnyanoba Salunke. Said Hanumat had purchased one Minidoor Auto for the livelihood. Said vehicle was insured with opponent insurance company from 12.12.2005 to 11.12.2006 through policy bearing No.271401/31/05/6300003080. On 28.03.2006 Hanumant was plying his auto on Murud to Latur road. One bus bearing No. MH.20.B.5946 gave dash him from the front side. In the said accident Hanumant was died. Accordingly Crime No.11/2006 was registered at Police Station Gategaon. Complainant informed the said incident to the insurance company and demanded the policy amount, but insurance company did not settle her claim. Therefore she approached to Fo...
Bakhshish Singh Vs. Hdfc Bank Limited and Another
Court: Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Dev Raj, Member: 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 23.01.2014, rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, UT, Chandigarh (hereinafter to be called as the District Forum only) vide which it dismissed the complaint, filed by the complainant (now appellant). 2. In brief, the facts of the case, are that the complainant availed of personal loan from the Bank of Punjab, Sector 9, Chandigarh, which merged into Centurian Bank and later on, merged into HDFC Bank. It was stated that on 30.10.2006, the complainant visited the office of Opposite Party No.2, and he was suggested that the limit of his personal loan, could be increased provided he was ready to settle the arrears of original personal loan, in one installment. It was further stated that consequently, the complainant was sanctioned loan of Rs.2,10,000/- vide sanction letter dated 30.10.2006 (Annexure C-1), out of which, Rs.1,10,960/- were adjusted, towards the arrears of original personal loan. It was...
Raosaheb Vs. Dy. Executive Engineer, Msedcl Beed
Court: SCDRC
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Uma S. Bora, Member: 1. Raosaheb Annarao Nagargoje appellant herein/original complainant challenges in this appeal dismissal of consumer complaint No.31/2007 by District Forum Beed on 28.11.2007. 2. Facts giving rise to this appeal are as under: Complaint was filed against Dy. Executive Engineer, MSEDCL, Urban, Beed. Complainant is residing at officer colony Beed and had obtained electric connection for domestic purpose. Consumer number of complainant was 576010208521 and his meter number was 9000148237. It is the case of the complainant that he was regularly paying the electricity bills, but as his electric meter was burnt he applied with the respondent on 12.07.2000 for replacement of the meter, but his application was not responded. In Dec.2003 digital meter was installed. Complainant had deposited regularly electricity charges even though bill of Dec.2005 and 2nd Jan.2006 for Rs.10,550/- was issued. Said bill was of exorbitant amount and therefore complainant got the shock. Therefo...
Satya Prakash Vs. Icici Lombard General, Insurance Company Ltd.
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
S.A. Siddiqui, Member (Judicial): 1) Complainant/ Appellant has filed this appeal under section 15 of the C.P. Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the Act) against judgment and order dt. 07.03.2012 passed by DCDRF (Central) Maharana Pratab Bus Terminal, Kashmiri Gate, Delhi. In complaint case no. 307/10 Sh. Satya Prakash Vs ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. 2) Complainant/ Appellant secured a Health Insurance policy no. 40341/fpp/02853238/01/000, Vide Card No. IHPN-05229030/01 for Rs.2,00,000/- The period of Insurance was 21.11.2009 to 20.11.2011. On 23.02.2010 with complainant felt heart problem, he therefore approached Sir Ganga Ram Hospital for treatment. He made efforts to get cash less Medical facility from the Insurance Company but could not get proper response. Ultimately he was admitted in the hospital on 01.03.2010. He underwent Heart-Surgery in the Hospital and was discharged on 09.03.2010. Before discharge he made payment of Rs.1,86,488/- on 17.03.2010. He again felt so...
Yarlagadda Krishna Murthy Vs. Sree Gokulam Chit and Finance Co (P) Ltd ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member) 1. All the revision petitions are directed against the order dated 08.07.2013 passed by the District Forum in petitions seeking direction to the Registrar of Chits, Chennai Central, Tamilandu for furnishing of details of chit group No.G2J/104/12 dated 20.03.2004 and for production of account copy ticket No.12 in the proceedings. As such all the revision petitions are disposed of by a common order. R.P.No.64 of 2013 is taken as a lead case. 2. The revision petitioned filed complaint and sought for reliefs for payment of compensation from the opposite parties on the premise of deficiency in service and also sought direction to the Registrar of Chits, Chennai Central to furnish accurate information regarding the amounts paid by the complainant and dividend allowed to him in the chit transaction. The petitioner had filed petition I.A.No.34 of 2013 seeking direction to the Registrar of Chits, Chennai Central, Tamilandu to furnish details of chit...
Debashis Saha Vs. Xcelvice Excellent Service (Benq Authorised Customer ...
Court: Tripura State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Agartala
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
S. Baidya, J. 1. This appeal filed under section 15 of the C.P.Act, 1986 on 03.09.13 by the appellant/complainant is directed against the judgment dated 24.07.13 passed by the Ld. District Forum, West Tripura, Agartala in case No.C.C-27/12 whereby the Ld. District Forum has been pleased to dismiss the complaint with a direction to the complainant to collect the projector from the service centre of the O.P. on payment of repairing cost. 2. The case of the appellant as narrated in the memo of appeal, in brief, is that on 27.02.12 the appellant filed a complaint (C.C-27 of 2012) against the respondent in the Ld. District Forum, West Tripura and on 24.07.2013 the Forum most unfortunately dismissed the said complaint holding the said complaint to be a bad one for non-joiner of parties. 3. It has also been stated that the appellant in the said complaint depicted the deficiency in service and the unfair trade practice on the part of the respondent, despite the final notice dated 10.02.12 of t...
Kapil Chit (Kosta) Private Limited Rep. by Its Branch Manager Vs. Kimi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member) 1. M/s Kapil Chit Funds Pvt Ltd is the appellant. The appeal is directed against the order of the District Forum whereby the appellant was directed to pay Rs.3,55,000/- together with interest @ 12% pa. from the date of auction till the date of realization and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and costs of Rs.3,000/-. 2. The respondent subscribed to the chit reference No.FRMTO4J/49 for chit value of Rs.5,00,000/- conducted by the appellant company and the chit period was for 50 months on monthly subscription @ Rs.10,000/-. The chit was commenced on 29.12.2010 and the respondent participated in the auction conducted on 28.05.2012 for the prize amount of Rs.3,55,000/-. The respondent was declared successful bidder. The respondent claimed that he furnished the sureties as required by the appellant company and as the appellant- company failed to pay the prize amount, he filed the complaint claiming the prize amount with interest and comp...
Dr. Sumantra Gupta, Darjeeling Vs. Dipak Ghosh and Others
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
Kalidas Mukherjee, President This order relates to hearing on the petition for condonation of delay of 181 days in filing this appeal. It has been stated in the petition for condonation of delay that no notice was served upon the Appellant herein in the complaint case. The Learned District Forum did not send the copy of order to the Appellant. The Appellant had no knowledge about the order impugned and it was only after the receipt of notice in connection with execution case no.46 of 2013 the Appellant came to learn about the judgment passed in the complaint case. Thereafter the certified copy of the order was obtained and the appeal has been filed and in the mean time the delay of 181 days occurred. It has been submitted by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant that the complaint case was allowed ex parte against OP No.4/Appellant herein and no notice was served upon the Appellant in the complaint case before the Learned District Forum. The Respondent No.1/Complainant opposed the peti...
- ‹ Prev
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- Next ›
- Last »