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.
Saroj Anil Bajaj Vs. Hsbc Bank Oman S.A.O.G.
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: May-15-2014
Naredra Kawde, Member: [1] Complainant booked a residential flat with Keshavdeo Poddar and Co. for total consideration of Rs.7,99,350/- and relied on the allotment letter dated 01/12/1997 issued by the said builder/developer company. Amount of Rs.50,000/- in cash was paid as earnest money. Further amount of Rs.4,00,000/- was to be paid on 31/01/1998 and on failure to do so allotment was liable to be cancelled with forfeiture of Rs.50,000/- paid as earnest money. Amount of Rs.1,84,000/- was to be credited to the account of the complainant in the Oman International Bank S.A.O.G. located at Nariman Point, Mumbai (hereinafter to be referred as Opponent Bank). Said amount was transferred by Telegraphic Transfer (T.T.) from Oman International Bank S.A.O.G., Muttarah, Muscat. This amount was transferred by Mr.Mohamed Ashfaque from his account at Oman International Bank S.A.O.G., Muttarah, Muscat to the account of the complainant in the same Bank branch located at Mumbai. The amount was transf...
M/S. Eterna Industries Rep. by Its Proprietor and Others Vs. Bitra Vas ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: May-15-2014
Oral Order: (R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member) 1. The appeal is filed by the opposite parties in CC 160/2011 pm the file of the District Forum II, Krishna at Vijayawada challenging the order dated 20.03.2013. 2. The respondents are running jewel work shop in Vijayawada. The first complainant and one Murala Pradeep, attended demonstration at Chennai and agreed to purchase three German made Semi Automatic side cut cable chain machines of two different sizes i.e. 0.25 MM and 0.35 MM @ Rs.1,75,000/- each and three Indian Made Semi Automatic side cut cable chain Machine @ Rs.85,000/- each. On 20.04.2011 the 1st complainant paid an amount of Rs.5,80,000/- by cash and Rs.40,000/- by way of cheque bearing No. 103267 dt. 25.04.2011 to the appellants which includes Rs.6,750/- tax for German made machine and other charges. 3. The respondents agreed to purchase three German Made machines for Rs.1,75,000/- each and three Indian made machines @ Rs.85,000/- each from the appellants and paid an amount ...
M/S. M.S. Manufacturing Company Vs. the New India Assurance Company Lt ...
Court: SCDRC
Decided on: May-14-2014
B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. The complainant is a partnership firm run in the name and style M/s M.S Manufacturing Company, situated at Plot No.233, Rai, District Sonepat. It runs the business of manufacturing of Corrugated Boxes. The firm purchased Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy (Exhibit C-4) from the New India Insurance Co. Ltd (opposite parties) covering the period from 18thJune 2012 to 17thJune, 2013. Prior thereto also, the insurance policy was purchased from the opposite parties. The total insured amount was Rs.70.00 lacs (i.e. Rs.30.00 lacs for building-super structure, Rs.20.00 lacs for plant machinery and accessories and Rs.20.00 lacs for stock and stocks in process). In the insurance policy, there was Clause 4, that is, reinstatement of value policy clause. 2. On January 5th, 2013, at about 3.30 a.m. fire took place in the premises of the company. Fire tenders were called (Ex.C-11). The fire could be extinguished after about six hours. FIR (Ex.C-12) was got registe...
M/S. M.S. Manufacturing Company Vs. the New India Assurance Company Lt ...
Court: Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Decided on: May-14-2014
B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. The complainant is a partnership firm run in the name and style M/s M.S Manufacturing Company, situated at Plot No.233, Rai, District Sonepat. It runs the business of manufacturing of Corrugated Boxes. The firm purchased Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy (Exhibit C-4) from the New India Insurance Co. Ltd (opposite parties) covering the period from 18thJune 2012 to 17thJune, 2013. Prior thereto also, the insurance policy was purchased from the opposite parties. The total insured amount was Rs.70.00 lacs (i.e. Rs.30.00 lacs for building-super structure, Rs.20.00 lacs for plant machinery and accessories and Rs.20.00 lacs for stock and stocks in process). In the insurance policy, there was Clause 4, that is, reinstatement of value policy clause. 2. On January 5th, 2013, at about 3.30 a.m. fire took place in the premises of the company. Fire tenders were called (Ex.C-11). The fire could be extinguished after about six hours. FIR (Ex.C-12) was got registe...
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. M/S. Indo Phytochem Pharmaceuti ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Shimla
Decided on: May-14-2014
Justice (Retd.) Surjit Singh, President (Oral): 1. Cheque for a sum of Rs.2,35,176/- has been submitted. Money be invested in a fixed deposit with the same bank, with which initial deposit of Rs.25,000/- has been made. Disposed of. 2. Present appeal is directed against the order dated 16.11.2013, of learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sirmour at Nahan, whereby, a complaint, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, filed against the appellant by respondent-M/s. Indo Phytochem Pharmaceuticals, has been partly allowed and a direction given to the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.1,75,797/-, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum and also to pay Rs.10,000/-, on account of compensation and Rs.2,000/-, on account of litigation expenses. 3. Respondent-complainant had a factory at Moginand (Kala Amb) in Sirmour District. It (the respondent) insured the building, stock, plant and machinery, with the appellant in the sum of Rs.1.22 crores, from 24.01.2007 to 23.01.20...
Sewa Samiti Charitable Hospital and Research Centre Vs. Malkeet Kaur a ...
Court: Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Decided on: May-13-2014
Nawab Singh, President (Oral): 1. Sewa Samiti Charitable Hospital and Research Centre, Market No.1, NIT Faridabad “opposite party No.1 is in revision against the order dated January 15th, 2014 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Faridabad, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for dismissal of the complaint in view of the provision of Section 24-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the Act, 1986), was dismissed. 2. Smt. Malkeet Kaur-complainant filed complaint No.438 of 2010 before the District Forum under Section 12 of the Act, 1986 against the petitioner-opposite party No.1 and Asian Institute of Medical Sciences, Faridabad- opposite party No.2. 3. During the pendency of the complaint, learned counsel for the complainant made the following statement:- œStatement of Sh. N.P. Singh, Adv. Counsel for the complainant. Due to misunderstanding of medical terminology, the complainant has filed this complaint in ...
Shriram General Insurance Company Limited and Another Vs. Joginder Sin ...
Court: Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Decided on: May-13-2014
Nawab Singh, President (Oral): 1. This appeal has been filed by Shriram General Insurance Company Limited (for short Insurance Company) against the order dated October 25th, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Panipat, whereby Joginder Singh-complainant (respondent) was granted benefits of insurance in respect of his motorcycle which was stolen during the subsistence of the insurance policy. For facilitation, the operative part of the order is reproduced as under:- œIn view of above discussion, present complaint succeeds. We hereby allowed the present complaint with a direction to opposite parties to pay Rs.32,500/- sum insured to the complainant with interest @ 9% 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 opposite parties to the complainant. This order shall be complied within 30 days from the announcement of this order.? 2. Jogin...
Lalit Kumar Dhiman Vs. M/S. Yellow Stone Builders Pvt. Ltd. and Anothe ...
Court: Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
Decided on: May-13-2014
Padma Pandey, Member: 1. This Execution Application has been filed by the complainant/Decree Holder, under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act only) for enforcement of the order dated 26.11.2013, passed by this Commission, in the Consumer Complaint, bearing No.63 of 2013, tilted as œLalit Kumar Dhiman Vs. M/s Yellow Stone Builders Pvt. Ltd. and another vide which the Opposite Parties/judgments debtors were directed as under: œ9. For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is partly accepted, with costs, in the following manner:- i. Opposite Party No.1 is directed to refund the amount of Rs.21,60,120/-, to the complainant, within one month, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. ii. The Opposite Parties are jointly and severally directed to pay cost of litigation, to the tune of Rs.10,000/-, to the complainant. iii. In case the payment of amount, mentioned in Clause (i), is not made, within the stipul...
Om Spero Hospital Vs. Raj Kumar Sharma
Court: Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Decided on: May-13-2014
B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. Delay of seven days in filing of the appeal is condoned for the reasons stated in the application filed by the appellant. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated November 21st, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Palwal, whereby, complaint filed by Raj Kumar Sharma-complainant (respondent herein) alleging medical negligence and deficiency in service, was accepted in the following terms:- œOpposite party is directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint till the realization within 30 days to complainant which he spent on treatment. Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment alongwith Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses as well as Rs.2,000/- as traveling expenses within 30 days from the receipt of this order to the complainant.? 3. Raj Kumar Sharma-complainant was admitted in th...
M S E B Through Chairman and Another Vs. Shamsundar S. Jaipuriya
Court: SCDRC
Decided on: May-13-2014
B.A. Shaikh, Judicial Member: 1. This appeal is preferred by the original Opposite Party (for short OP) Nos.1 and 2, against the order dated 19/01/2002 passed in consumer complaint bearing CC No.77/2001by the District Forum, Yavatmal 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 has taken electric connection from the OP Nos.1 and 2 to run his proprietary concern under the name and style as œM/s Sati Oil Mill?. The OP issued excess bill of the month of December,1998 for Rs.9066/- and, therefore, it was returned by the complainant to OP for correction. The OP again sent excess bill of the month of January,1999 for Rs.9207.55/-. Then the OP issued another excess bill of the month of February,99 dated 10/3/1999 for Rs.32,113/-. The said bill for Rs.32,113/- was to be paid till 30/4/1999 with delayed payment charges (DPC). Therefore, the OP had no authority to disconnect electric supply till 30/4/1999 f...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »