Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... already, in as much as the complainant has chosen to vindicate his grievances, more particularly his intention of initiating legal proceedings in ex.a10 dt.8.6.2002, the period of limitation would have started from that date on wards viz. ..... after of the specific stand taken by the banking ombudsman in treating the complaint as closed on 31.3.2003, the complainant has continued to correspond with other authorities including banking ombudsman. ..... relevant portions are extracted as hereunder: sec.24-a of the consumer protection act 1986 expressly casts a duty on the commission admitting a complaint, to dismiss a complaint unless the complainant satisfies the district forum, the state commission or the national commission, as the case may be, that the ..... the section debars any fora set up under the act, admitting a complaint unless the complaint is filed within two years from the date of which the cause of action ..... slofter, he is not a consumer within the meaning of the act, and the averments in the complaint would clearly establish that he had approached the opposite party for commercial transaction and not in his ..... as per sec.17 of the act, the pecuniary jurisdiction of the state commission is upto ..... 24(a) of the consumer protection act, the complaint is liable to be dismissed as barred ..... is carefully worded that the complainant is engaged in the business under self employment , the said wordings appears to have been incorporated to overcome the specific exclusion under sec.2 (d) of the act. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... and further under ex.b2 seeds act 1966 regarding the same also mentioned with the same details and further it is stated under the caption general no suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall lie against the government of any officer who get protection under section 22 of the act for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this act.? ..... the complainant not proved what kind of procedure followed in cultivating the crop, the opposite parties cannot be held liable for any deficiency of service and when the protection is given under the act, unless they have not acted in good faith or intended to do so, in these circumstances, simply because the complainant alleged the purchase of seeds from the 2nd opposite party through the opposite parties 1 to 3 the expected yield was not given .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... opposite party in which 2nd and 3rd opposite parties were functioning as conductor and driver on payment of rs.340/- as ticket charges from trichy to pumba on 10.12.2009 and on reaching dindigul the bus was not proceeded due to break down of mechanical defects which alleged an act of god by the opposite parties and thereafter the complainant had not continued his journey in the alleged alternative arrangement made by the opposite parties. ..... the opposite parties being the state owned public transport corporation and when it is contended due to unexpected circumstances because of break down the journey could not be continued with the same bus and they have stated that they have made alternative arrangements as soon as possible which was not controverted by the complainant in any other mode of proof or ..... 10.12.09 from trichy to pumba on payment of rs.340/- started at 22.00 hours from trichy and after reaching dindigul due to certain repair the bus could not be proceeded further and thereby the 2nd and 3rd opposite parties have not made any alternative arrangements and thereafter the complainant on his own alternative arrangements reached the pumba with delay ..... he has produced only copy of the computerized ticket issued by the 1st opposite party and the letter addressed to the 1st opposite party and legal notice sent and no other documents to expose his alleged sufferings and also no evidence to prove that the opposite parties failed to make alternative arrangements as soon as the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... of the district forum the appellant/complainant has come forward with this appeal and the learned counsel for the appellant contended it is the opposite parties delayed act in accepting the proposal and sending the policy bond the complainants husband who died after paying the 1st premium regarding the insurance was not in a position ..... to pay his subsequent policy premium before his death and thereby there was deficiency in service by the opposite parties and after giving a legal notice the complaint was filed claiming the policy amount of rs.25,000/- with interest at 18% and rs.50,000/- as compensation and rs.2,000/- as costs. 3. ..... (a) the opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of rs.25,000/- towards the policy amount to the complainant as the beneficiary/legal heir of proposer late v.m.jayapandian without any interest (b) to pay a sum of rs.1,000/- towards costs to the complainant (c ) no order as to costs in this appeal and ..... national consumer disputes redressal commission, new delhi in r.p.no.820/2007 dated 19.8.2011 the complainant is entitled for the entire policy amount of rs.25,000/- as nominee or the legal heir of the proposer from the opposite parties and thereby this appeal deserves to be allowed. 8. ..... , reported in 2002 (3) cpj 117(nc) in which it is stated as follows :- consumer protection act, 1986 section 21(b) jurisdiction ex-gratia payment under welfare scheme of government refused complaint decreed by forum, set aside in appeal licence fee paid by deceased amount .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... during the course of the proceedings before us, we issued notice to the motor vehicles inspector gr.i, zonal office, ulundurpet to report to us whether any licence was issued to p.sengodan, son of ponnaiya gounder, 1/77, mariamman koil street, perungoor village, thandalai po, kallakurichi taluk. ..... the complainant, without complying with the request, has chosen to issue legal notice. ..... the onus was on the complainant to prove the validity of the driving licence while furnishing the original driving licence as provided under sec.63 of the evidence act. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... the appeal is filed by raising a main contention to the effect that the complaint does not come within the purview of the consumer protection act and the dispute of the complainant is arising out of the service conditions and the dispute raised by him is for the refund of the provident fund amount, after his retirement. 4. ..... however, the other legal issues that are urged in the grounds of appeal are left open and the same need not be decided in this proceedings. 7. ..... is none else than a retired sweeper, employed in the office of the appellant, and the fact that the appellant had already deposited the entire amount as ordered by the district forum, we do not propose to go into the legal contentions raised by the appellant at this stage. 6. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... their knowledge of opposite party by him; extending false promise like setting right grievances, making a subscriber to run after them for getting refund payment of refund after service of legal notice and violation of their own terms and conditions of trai direction and claiming refund of balance of security deposit amount and excess payment refund of money claiming compensation for rs.13,52,861/-. 3. ..... are of the view that in view of the dictum of the honble supreme court the complainant has to approach concerned arbitrator to be appointed under sec.7b of the indian telegraph act by the concerned communication services to get the grievances redressed and thereby as the honble supreme court ruled the dispute between the service provider and the consumer has to be decided by ..... , a company having under the control of the trai and comes under the post and telegraph act for the purpose of service and the complainant claimed reliefs for refund of excess billing and deficiency in service relating ..... of service and further complaint is not maintainable for want of privity of contract between the complainant and the opposite party as on the date of filing this complaint stating that continues contract was on as if continuous process was on. 6. ..... service and further complaint is not maintainable for want of privity of contract between the complainant and the opposite party as on the date of filing of this complaint stating that the continues contract was on as if continuous process was on. 5. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... as per the terms and conditions of the policy earlier to the legal notice exhibit a6, that the 1st opposite party or 2nd opposite party was informed about the accident and claim made to that effect within the limits of time prescribed under the policy terms ..... he had no knowledge about the accident and subsequent details to be informed to the 1st opposite party and in this case the accident took place on 28.06.07 and regarding the claim was intimated through the legal notice only on 13.7.09 after more than 2 years and 1 month from the date of accident even though a case was registered before the concerned police station at hospet and the complainant failed to establish ..... would be departing from the plain and literal words of sec.17(2) (b) of the act but such departure is sometimes necessary (as it is in this case) to avoid ..... which is time barred and jurisdiction barred and as the claim was not made within the time and also he has already availed compensation under the workmen compensation act and the cause of action will not arise from the date of issue of legal notice. ..... opposite party branch for the period from 5.2.07 to 4.2.08 and sustained grievous injury due to road accident on 28.6.07 in andhra pradesh and thereby the complainant claimed compensation under workmen compensation act and in which the sum of rs.5,31,000/- as per exhibit b3. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... version denied the allegations and stated complainant is not a consumer and the complainant has to seek remedy under sec.90 of the tamilnadu co-operative societies act 1983 and the 2nd opposite party having no contract directly with the complainant and the 1st opposite party is not accountable to the 2nd opposite party and both are different legal entity and there was no allegation against 2nd opposite party specifically by the complainant. ..... for those letters the complainant sent a reply in exhibit a7 on 27.11.2003 stating that in order to distract the complainant from the proceedings of the district forum those letters were sent and he will be in a position to receive the same if disbursed through the district forum. ..... in the meanwhile, the opposite party has initiated steps to collect interest and other charges for the first instalment paid as per the proceedings exhibit b10 and b11 and as per exhibit a1. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... the complaint filed under section 17 of the consumer protection act- 1986 : complainant filed a complaint claiming compensation of rs.6,00,000/- for the loss mental agony and sufferings due to the negligence of opposite parties regarding the delivery of the child and for the costs. 2. ..... hence after giving legal notice dated 18.11.01 the complainant came forward with this consumer complaint claiming above reliefs. 3. ..... regarding the legal notice proper reply was given and mentioning of weight as 73 kgs on 23.3.01 as wrongly noted as 79 kgs within 4 days no person could gain 7 kgs of weight and thereby the complaint to be dismissed as not maintainable. 4. .....
Tag this Judgment!