Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on : Nov-03-2003
..... briefly stated, are that the respondent m/s. bhatter silver smith pvt. ltd. through its director shri roshan dabriwal, had filed a complaint under section 12 of the act before the district forum, averring therein that the respondent was engaged in the business of fabrication of silver jewellery and a jewellers block insurance policy bearing no ..... no. 17-a/39, vardan house, ajmal khan road, karol bagh, new delhi. it was stated that the policy issued by the appellant covered risk against fire, explosion, lightening, riot, strike, malicious damage, burglary, house-breaking, theft and robbery. it was stated that despite all round security, on the night falling between 10th/11th may ..... in service and on the basis of above finding has passed the impugned order. 8. feeling aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the present appeal under section 15 of the act. 9. we have heard the learned counsel for the appellant at length and have also carefully gone through the documents/material on record. on the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on : Sep-05-2003
..... if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the same within the above said period. the words sufficient cause occurring in proviso to section 15 of the act, are of utmost significance. as per settled law, culled out from various judicial decisions, the above expression sufficient cause, though deserves to receive a liberal ..... the question of admission of the present appeal and have also carefully gone through the documents/material on record. in terms of the provisions contained in section 15 of the act, a person, aggrieved by an order, made by the district forum, can prefer an appeal against such order to the state commission within a ..... appeal, briefly stated, are that the appellant m/s. misuki exports pvt. ltd. through its director shri shyam sunder verma had filed a complaint under section 12 of the act before the district forum, averring therein that appellant was a reputed business concern, engaged in the business of export of readymade garments. it was stated .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on : Jul-17-2003
..... for any commercial purpose. 3. the term commercial purpose occurring in the above said sub-clause, has been further defined in explanation added to clause (d) sub-section (1) of section 2 of the act as under : explanation for the purposes of this clause, commercial purpose does not include use by a person of goods bought and used by him and services availed ..... of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment. 4. on a bare perusal of the definition of the term consumer as contained in section 2 (1)(d)(ii) of the act as amended by the amending act of 2002 it is apparent that one who avails of services for any commercial purpose is not a consumer and as such a complaint filed ..... has come into force w.e.f. 15.3.2003. as a result of the amendments, effected in the act, which have come into force w.e.f. 15.3.2003, in clause (ii)(d) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the act which defines the term consumer the following words have been added but does not include a person who avails .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on : Jul-10-2003
..... . the facts, relevant for the disposal of the above mentioned petitions lie in a narrow compass. the respondents, in the above mentioned petitions, had filed separate complaints under section 12 of the act before the district forum alleging deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner. the complaints, so filed by the respondents, were allowed by the district forum. since the ..... hassan khan v. sheo baksh singh, (1884) ii ind. app. 237 (pc), and in case balakrishna udayar v. vasudeva aiyar, air 1917 pc 71, the honble supreme court quoted what the privy council had stated in case n.s. venkatagiri ayyangar v. hindu religious endowments board, madras, air 1949 pc 156. it was held that section 115 empowers the high court to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on : Jul-01-2003
..... by the ops within sixty days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which the complainant would be at liberty to file an application under sections 25/27 of the act as the complainant may be advised for the implementation of this order. the above complaint, filed by the complainant, stands disposed of in above terms. ..... is stated on behalf of the ops that on 1st june, 1994 a report was received by the ops regarding an incident of fire in the engineering/electrical section of the complainant and a request was made by the complainant to depute some one to survey the damage. it is stated that accordingly messrs. a.k. ..... lokeshwar prasad, president: 1. the complainant, ashok country resort, through its promoter, shri r.n. sahni, has filed the present complaint under section 17 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the act), against the above said opposite parties (for short ops) averring (sic.) kapashera, new delhi, for rs. 4.90 crores, vide policy bearing no. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on : May-29-2003
..... facts, leading to the filing of the present appeal, in brief, are that the appellant had approached the learned district forum with a complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the act) with the grievance that the appellant is subscriber of two telephone nos. 7276877 and 7270984 installed at his premises. the telephone no. 7276877 went ..... of the district forum as modified by this commission within 45 days of the receipt of this order failing which the appellant will be entitled to file an application under sections 25/27 of the act for the implementation of this order, as the appellant may be advised. appeal allowed.
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on : May-07-2003
..... district forum as modified be complied with within 45 days of the receipt of this order failing which the appellant would be at liberty to move an application under sections 25/27 of the act, as the appellant may be advised for the implementation of the order. the present, filed by the appellant, stands disposed of in above terms. appeal partly allowed ..... circuit and another v. mtnl. 2. briefly stated, the relevant facts are, that the appellant had filed a complaint before the district forum under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the act) averring therein that the complainant is partner of m/s. travel circuit an iata accredited agency and director of m/s. tumberline trekking camps pvt .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on : May-01-2003
..... learned district forum has also awarded a sum of rs. 1,000/- as cost of litigation. feeling aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the present appeal under section 15 of the act. 7. a notice of the appeal was issued to the respondents, who have entered appearance through their advocate and have also filed a detailed reply to ..... the learned counsel for the appellant had also taken an objection to the effect that the complaint filed by the respondents, was barred by limitation under section 24a of the act. on a perusal of the documents/material on record it is further apparent that the respondents during the course of arguments had prayed that they ..... the present appeal briefly stated, are that the respondents, shri bhagwan dass malik and smt. radha malik, had filed joint complaint before the district forum, under section 12 of the act, averring therein that the respondents, in response to an advertisement issued by the appellant in may, 1988, which was published in the newspapers, had booked a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on : Jan-12-2003
..... application, filed by the petitioners, has been rejected by the learned district forum vide impugned order. 8. feeling aggrieved, the petitioners have filed the above mentioned petition under section 17(b) of the act. we have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at length on the question of admission of the present petition and have also carefully gone through the documents ..... hassan khan v. sheo baksh singh, (1884) ii ind. app. 237 (pc), and in case balakrishna udayar v. vasudeva aiyar, air 1917 pc 71, the honble supreme court quoted what the privy council had stated in case n.s. venkatagiri ayyangar v. hindu religious endowments board, madras, air 1949 pc 156. it was held that section 115 empowers the high court to .....
Tag this Judgment!