Scdrc Court May 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.
Delhi Development Authority Vs. Geeta Kumari
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on: May-01-2014
N.P. Kaushik, Member (Judicial): 1. We have heard Ms Arti Bansal, Counsel for the Appellant and Ms Geeta Kumari, respondent in person. 2. Present appeal has been filed against the order dated 25.02.2013 passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi. Vide impugned orders, the complainant / respondent, Ms Geeta Kumari was awarded damages to the tune of Rs. 1 lac and litigation expenses of Rs. 25,000/-. 3. Facts in brief are that the complainant, Ms Geeta Kumari got herself registered with OP/DDA for the allotment of a flat in a scheme floated by DDA in the year 1979. She was allotted flat bearing No. 98, Sector A-9, Pocket-4, Group-I, Narela, Delhi in a draw of lots held on 15.5.98. Admittedly, the complainant deposited the amounts demanded from her by the DDA from time to time, as per schedule. It is also not in dispute that the complainant instead of taking physical possession of the flat, requested for a flat in a different locality. Complainant ...
Tata Motors Finance Limited Vs. Rashmi Bagga
Court: Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Raipur
Decided on: May-01-2014
R.S. Sharma, President: 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 23.11.2012, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (C.G.) (henceforth District Forum") in Complaint Case No.363/2010. By the impugned order, the learned District Forum, has partly allowed the complaint of the respondent (complainant) and directed the appellant (O.P.) to pay a sum of Rs.3,16,664/- along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till date of payment. The District Forum has further directed the appellant (O.P.) to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and unfair trade practice and Rs.2,000/- as advocate fees and cost of litigation. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the complaint of the respondent (complainant) before the District Forum are : that the respondent/complainant purchased a vehicle Safari LX bearing registration No.C.G.04-CA-3555 from T.M.F.L. Raipur Branch on 19.07.2007. Out of Rs.7,31,568/, which the price of the vehicle, the r...
Klg Hyundai and Another Vs. Surbhi Gupta and Others
Court: Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
Decided on: May-01-2014
Sham Sunder (Retd.), President: 1. This order shall dispose of the aforesaid two First Appeals bearing No. 80 of 2014 titled as KLG Hyundai Vs. Surbhi Gupta and Others filed by Opposite Party No.2 (now appellant) and No.89 of 2014 tiled as Hyundai Motors India Ltd. Vs. Surbhi Gupta and Ors. filed by Opposite Party No.1 (now appellant), against the order dated 30.1.2014, rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, UT, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the District Forum) vide which it allowed the complaint filed by the complainant (now respondent No.1 in both the appeals) and directed Opposite Parties No.1and2 jointly and severally in the following manner; œ15] In view of the foregoing discussion and findings, we opine that the vehicle in question is suffering from manufacturing defect, as a result, the maneuvering of steering is not smooth, the vehicle is pulling on to the left hand side and there is unusual wear and tear of the tyres. Resultantly, the comp...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›