Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... be recorded hereinafter. 11. the first question, which falls for consideration, is, as to whether, the complainant was a consumer, within the definition of section 2(1)(d) of the act or not. though the complainant had stated in para 1 of the complaint, that it was a private limited company formed by its members for earning ..... indulgence into unfair trade practice. when the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the act only), was filed, directing opposite party, to refund rs.1,13,138 and rs.2,822/- alongwith interest @12% per ..... business was being run for earning huge profits, by raising commercial loans etc. has force. thus, the complainant did not fall within the definition of consumer under the act. 12. the next question, which falls for consideration, is, as to whether there was any deficiency, in rendering service, on the part of the respondent/opposite .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... for private purpose, therefore, it did not require any permit, does not appear to be correct. in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of section 41 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 (59 of 1988) and in supersession of the notification of the government of india, in the erstwhile ministry of surface transport no. s ..... dismissed, holding that since the vehicle was being plied, on the road, without any valid route permit, which was in contravention of the provisions of section 66 of the motor vehicles act 1988, as also in breach of the fundamental condition of the insurance policy, the claim was rightly repudiated. similar principle of law, was laid ..... the transit mixture, for carrying on the commercial activity. thus, the vehicle, in question, fell within the definition of a transport vehicle, as defined under section 2(47) of the motor vehicles act, 1988. the district forum was also right, in holding so. 14. the next question, that falls for consideration, is, as to whether, the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... , a complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the act only), was filed, directing the opposite parties, to refund the amount of rs.7,750/-, being the cost of tablet; compensation to the tune ..... further stated that neither the tablet aforesaid was returned after the rectification of defects, nor the same was replaced with a new one. it was further stated that the aforesaid acts of the opposite parties, amounted to deficiency, in rendering service, as also indulgence into unfair trade practice. when the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... also comes within the definition a service. under these circumstances, the complaint involved the consumer dispute, and the same was maintainable. not only this, section 3 of the act, provides an alternative remedy. even if, it is assumed that the complainant has a remedy to file a suit, for specific performance, in the ..... that falls for consideration, is, as to whether, this commission has got territorial jurisdiction, to entertain and decide the complaint, or not. according to section 17 of the act, the consumer complaint could be filed, by the complainant, before the state consumer disputes redressal commission, within the territorial jurisdiction whereof a part of cause ..... hassle free redressal to the grievance of the consumers. the provisions of the code of civil procedure, except the one provided under section 13(4) of the act, and the evidence act are not applicable to the consumer disputes. the consumer foras are to evolve their own procedure, for adjudicating the consumer disputes, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... into unfair trade practice. when the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the act only), was filed, directing the opposite parties, to refund the amount of rs.75,525/-, paid as fees, alongwith interest ..... of the case, the hon`ble supreme court held as under:- 10. the board is a statutory authority established under the bihar school examination board act, 1952. the function of the board is to conduct school examinations. this statutory function involves holding periodical examinations, evaluating the answer scripts, declaring the results ..... rendered for a consideration is presumed to be a commercial activity in its broadest sense (including professional activity or quasi-commercial activity). but the act does not intended to cover discharge of a statutory function of examining whether a candidate is fit to be declared as having successfully completed a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... sought refund, and, under these circumstances, it fell within the definition of a consumer. 13. as per the explanation appended to clause (ii) of section 2(d) of the act commercial purpose does not include use by a person of goods bought and used by him/her, and services availed of by him/her exclusively, for the ..... also indulgence into unfair trade practice . when the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint under section 17 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the act only), was filed, directing the opposite parties, to refund the amount of rs.31,73,358/- (infact rs.31,72,358), ..... of police, chandigarh, on 22.08.2013, and, after detailed inquiry, and investigation, fir no.70, at police station, sector 17, chandigarh, was registered, under sections 420/467/468/471 and 120b, of the indian penal code. it was further pleaded that harpreet singh mann, director of opposite party no.1, started embezzling and misusing .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... force. the mere existence of an arbitration clause, in the document, aforesaid, would not oust the jurisdiction of the consumer fora, in view of the provisions of section 3 of the act. similar principle of law, was laid down, in fair engg. pvt. ltd. and another vs. n.k.modi (1996)6 scc 385 and c.c.i ..... indulgence into unfair trade practice. when the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the act only), was filed, directing the opposite parties not to charge/demand the annual maintenance chargers or in the alternative refund the amount ..... stands rejected. 13. the next preliminary objection raised was regarding the existence of arbitration clause in the agreement. section 3 of the act, is worded in widest terms, and leaves no manner of doubt, that the provisions of the act, shall be, in addition to, and not in derogation of any other law, for the time being, in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... of delay of 31 days, as per the applicant/appellant (as per the office report 32 days), being devoid of merit, is dismissed. consequently, the appeal, under section 15 of the act, is also dismissed, being barred by time, as also on merits, at the preliminary stage, with no order as to costs. 25. certified copies of this order, ..... as stated above, it was obligatory, on the applicant/appellant, to take immediate steps to ensure that the appeal was filed within the prescribed period, as envisaged by section 15 of the act. however, the applicant/appellant, just slept over the matter, and did not take the requisite steps to file the appeal, in time. it was, thus, a case ..... is sufficient cause for condonation of delay of 31 days, as per the applicant/appellant (as per the office report 32 days), in filing the appeal, under section 15 of the act. it was held in smt.tara wanti vs state of haryana through the collector, kurukshetra air 1995 punjab and haryana 32, a case decided by a full bench .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... left with no alternative, a complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the act only), was filed, directing the opposite parties, to reimburse the amount of rs.12,56,347/-, alongwith interest @12% p. ..... from between one project site location to another (within 150 kms). locations : (1) 32 km milestone punahana nagina road, hodal (2) rampura chowk, delhi, jaipur highway, sec 82, ggn (3) okhla ph 1 and ii, n.delhi (future locations will be intimated by insured).? 20. in view of the aforesaid clause, in the aforesaid ..... was served upon the opposite parties, to redress the grievance of the complainant, but they did not reply the same. it was further stated that the aforesaid acts of the opposite parties, amounted to deficiency, in rendering service, as also indulgence into unfair trade practice. when the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... of an insurance policy. it takes into account the social security aspect of the matter. 13. there are three conditions for application of second part of section 45 of the insurance act which are: (a) the statement must be on a material matter or must suppress facts which it was material to disclose; (b) the suppression ..... c. chacko and anr. vs. chairman, life insurance corporation of india and ors, iii (2008) cpj 78 (sc), it was observed as under:- 11? section 45 of the insurance act reads as under:- 45. policy not to be called in question on ground of mis-statement after two years- no policy of life insurance effected before the ..... also indulgence into unfair trade practice. when the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the act only), was filed, directing the opposite party, to reimburse the amount of rs.11,21,125.50ps., referred to above, alongwith interest .....
Tag this Judgment!