Court : Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This appeal has been directed against order dated 28- 11-90 passed by the District Forum, Patna in complaint case No. 50 of 1989, and it has been filed by the appellant who was the opposite party before the District Forum and hereinafter called the opposite party. The respondent No. 1 was complainant before the District Forum (hereinafter called the complainant). 2. The complainant applied for allotment of a M.I.G. Flat at Patna to the Bihar State Housing Board (the O.P. - appellant), a statutory authority constituted under the Bihar State Housing Board Act, 1982 and got his application registered on 12.l2.72 and subsequently he deposited Rs. 2,000/- on 30.6.81 in the prescribed form on the receipt of a booklet from the O.P. which was sent to him after much delay and after several quarries made by the complainant with regard to the registeration of his application and that in the meantime flats were allotted to different persons and the claim of the complainan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
K.P. Sinha, Member: 1. This is an appeal against the order dated 9.8.91 passed by the learned District Forum, Sitamarhi in the complaint case No. 2 of 90 before them. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondent purchased from the appellant four traveller cheques bearing Nos. 114325 to 114328 for Rs. 2,500/- each from the Sitamarhi Branch of the Central Bank of India on 6.7.90. These traveller cheques were lost by her as her Briefcase which contained these traveller cheques was stolen on 11.7.90 from the Frontier Mail in which she was travelling. The complainant thereafter sent telegram from Delhi on 12.7.90 to the Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, Sitamarhi intimating the theft of the traveller cheques and on 16.7.90 she personally came over and claimed for the refund of the amount of Rs. 10,000/- for which he had purchased the traveller cheques which were stolen. No payment was made to her and she, therefore, made a complaint before the District Forum on 19th Decemb...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. The complainant No. 1 the proprietor of the Complainant No. 2 M/s. Laxmi Textiles, West Patel Nagar, Patna. 2. This case has been filed by them with averments hereinafter mentioned. Complainant No. 1 after obtaining financial assistance from Central Bank of India, Rukanpura Branch, Patna and the Bihar State Financial Corporation, Patna established M/s. Lakshmi Textiles a small scale industrial unit for manufacturing fine hosiery cloths and got it registered in the Industries Department, Government of Bihar bearing Registration No. 03/10/06762 dated 29.8.83. The complainant got the buildings, machines raw materials, finished and unfinished goods of the firm insured with the New India Assurance Company, Exhibition Road, Patna the opposite party No.2, under the Fire Insurance Cover. Initially the company insured the buildings, plant and machinery of the firm for 2.5 lakhs under Fire Temporary Cover Note A/c No. 608541 dated 14.11.88 for the period from 14.11.88 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 20th July, 1991 passed by the District Forum, Jehanabad in Complaint Case No. 50 of 91 in which the appellant was the complainant (hereinafter called the complainant) and respondent was the opposite party (hereinafter called the opposite party). 2. The relevant facts for the disposal of this appeal may be briefly stated. The opposite party invited offers for settlement of shops of various dimensions through bid with the condition that Rs. 200/- was to be deposited for taking part in bid and that the minimum official Salami for the shop was. Rs. 60,000/-and the monthly rental for a shop having a carpet area of 20 x 20 was Rs. 1,000/- and that the shop will be let out to the highest bider provided he deposited the 10% of the bid amount immediately and deposited the remaining amount within 15 days (vide Annexure-I to the Memo of Appeal). The complainant deposit d Rs. 200/- for taking part in the bid held on 25.1.91 and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This appeal as well as Appeal No. 219 of 1992 arise out of a common order and therefore they have been heard together and they are being disposed of by a common order. 2. These two appeals are directed against order dated 26.9.92 passed by the District Forum, Patna in Complainant Case No. 198 of 1992 in which the appellant in these two appeals were the opposite party and the respondent of these two appeals who is the same person was complainant before the District Forum. 3. For the disposal of this appeal the facts of the case may be briefly stated. The complainant booked order for a Premier Padmini Car (Delux) on 8.7.91 with the Auto Distributors- O.P. No. 1 who happens to be an authorised dealer of that car at Patna and paid Rs. 1,47,540.84 through two Bank Drafts which were received by one Sri Naveen Kumar Jain who happens to be an employee, of O.P. No. 1 and a receipt in respect thereof was issued to the complainant. On 19.7.91 on a telephone talk to O.P. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. The complainant has filed this case for refund of Rs. 40,462.44 of which the complainant had paid to the opposite parties for supply of cement to the complainant and has claimed 18% interest per annum. 2. The case of the complainant may be briefly stated. The complainant got a permit dated 18.5.85 issued by the Government of Bihar for the supply of 60 M.T. of cement with the Sone Valley Portland Cement Company Private Limited (the opposite Party No. 1 to 4) through O.P. No. 5 and a sum of Rs. 63,282/- was paid towards the same by the complainant, vide order of registration- cum-receipt dated 3.6.85 as modified by order dated 3.8.85. The delivery was to be taken by the complainant at the factory according to the schedule given below : Two trucks on 17.6.85 Two trucks on 19.6.85 and One truck on 22.6.85 The complainant sent two trucks as per schedule on 17.6.85 but no cement was supplied to him and the complainant was informed that the date of dispatch of cemen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Mr. Justice B.N. Sinha, President: 1. The complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency in service on the part of opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 the two banks, and he has claimed compensation on the ground of financial loss and sought other reliefs mentioned in the complaint petition. 2. The case of the complainant may be briefly stated. The complainant happens to be the father of Sri Pramod Kumar Jha who is the proprietor of a Small Scale Factory known as M/s. Kumar Textiles in the Industrial Estate, Bhagalpur under Unemployed Engineers Employment Scheme since 1979. Sri Pramod Kumar Jha as the proprietor of that factory applied for working capital loan in 1972 from the Central Bank of India, Bhagalpur where he had his account. The Manager of the Bank took the running guarantee of one lac rupees. But the loan was not disbursed to him and he was informed that loan of Rs. 15,000/- only was sanctioned to him which he had already got in his account in the year 1972. In the year 1973 the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This Case (64 of 91) and Case No. 65 of 91 arise out of the same cause and therefore they have been heard together on the point of their maintainability under the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter called the Act) and they are being disposed of by this common order. The complainant in both cases is the same. 2. The case of the complainant may be briefly stated. The Opposite Party in the Case No. 64 of 91-Dr. (Mrs.) Manju Geeta Mishra (hereinafter being referred to as Dr. (Mrs. Mishra) maintains a Nursing Home known named M.G.M. Nursing Home. Complainants wife Mrs. Bibha Nath was in the family way and she felt some labour pain on 13th August, 1991 and therefore the complainant took her to the Nursing Home of Dr. (Mrs.) Mishra at 3.00 p.m. on 13th August, 1991. On the advise of Dr. (Mrs.) Mishras the complainants wife was kept in the labour room of that nursing home. At 4.59 p.m. on the same day i.e., on 13th August, 1991, the complainants wife gave birth to a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. The Complainant has filed this case against the Opposite Party an eminent Orthopaedic Surgeon, alleging negligence in diagnosis and treatment by him and claiming compensation for the alleged loss and injury caused to him on that account. 2. The case as alleged by the Complainant in his complaint petition may be briefly stated. On 8.4.93 the Complainant sustained fracture injury on his left hand elbow region and after X-ray done on advise of local Pharmasist who was given first aid treatment and bandaging at Muzaffarpur. The Complainant came to Patna on 9.4.93 and contacted the Opposite Party in his clinic at Saidpur, Patna, and deposited his consultation fee. On examination of the Complainant's injury and X-ray report the Opposite Party directed the Complainant to report in Popular Nursing Home, Patna at 2.00 p.m. on the same day after getting some pathological tests done in Shanker Micro Pathological Laboratory, Patna. The Complainant accordingly got the path...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
K.P. Sinha, Member: 1. In this complaint petition the Akhil Bhartiye Grahak Panchayat, Jehanabad has complained against the Chief General Manager, Telecommunications, Bihar that even after the inauguration of the Jehanabad Electronic Exchange on 16.8.90 and the announcement from the Telephone Department that the pulse rate for telephonic calls made on STD from Jehanabad to Patna and Jehanabad to Gaya was 36/48/48 seconds, the STD calls were being charged at the rate of pulse rate of 12/24/48 for Patna-Jehanabad and Jehanabad-Gaya. The radial distance from Jehanabad to Patna and Jehanabad to Gaya is between 20 to 50 kms. and the STD Tarrif charge should be therefore 36-48-48 but the Jehanabad-Patna rate was being over charged at the pulse rate of 12 seconds for full-time STD calls. In support of the complaint the complainant filed two receipts which showed pulse rate of 12 seconds. The complainant has also drawn attention to the inquiry which got conducted by the District Forum, Jehanab...
Tag this Judgment!