Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... complainant within one month. aggrieved against the above order of district forum, the complainant mrs. inder prabha has filed appeal (no. 39 of 2001) under section 12 of consumer protection act, 1986. the main ground taken by the appellant is that the district forum has not awarded any compensation to her on account of the fact that ..... of deficiency in service on their part and rather have alleged that the complaint is false and the same is liable to be dismissed under section 26(a) of the consumer protection act. the respondents/o.ps. have further stated that the alternative plot cannot be allotted to the appellant/complainant as prayed for because the original ..... to entertain the same as the case falls within the area of consumer disputes redressal forum, kurukshetra. further the plea of limitation as envisaged under section 24(a) of the consumer protection act, 1986 has been raised and it has been prayed that the complaint be dismissed on that count as well. the respondents/o.ps. have .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... and female which are conducted free of cost. it is reiterated that sterilization facilities under family planning programme do not fall under the provision of section 3 of the said act. 13. this stand taken by the respondent was not controverted. we have already held above that the complainants have failed to establish that they ..... , as under : that the claimant no. 1 being wife of the deponent claimant no. 2 and beneficiary, with a view to promote the national cause against explosion of population, decided to undergo sterilization procedure at the e.s.i. medical dispensary, sector 29, chandigarh who took the deponents wife to primary health centre and ..... are provided free of cost to the population. they have not to pay for that. therefore, they do not fall within the ambit of section 2(1)(o) of the consumer protection act, 1986. 2. health department, chandigarh admn. has always provided quality services to esic beneficiaries, these include services under family planning sterilization of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... he and his family members underwent a lot of tension and shock and since belonging to a sikh family, their religious feelings were deeply hurt due to above stated act of careless bottling and sale of unhealthy products by the respondent/o.ps. the appellant/complainant has also alleged that this soft drink, if consumed, may have proved ..... might be sold by some third person under the brand name of coke and fanta and the answering respondent/o.p. no. 1 cannot be held liable for any such acts of third party. the respondent/o.p. no. 1, has further averred that its bottling procedures are fully automatic and the sophisticated machinery is used for washing, filling ..... person who purchases the goods for his personal use/consumption is a consumer within the meaning of definition given in the consumer protection act, 1986, hence his case is covered under the provisions of the c.p. act. the appellant has further stated that the factum of sale of hazardous drink has been admitted by respondent no. 2/o.p .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... cannot be held to be maintainable in the absence of the due sanction of the central government. we may further point out that section 3 of the c.p. act clearly provides that the provisions of this act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. ..... punjab, himachal pradesh and chandigarh. 2. this complaint has been filed by the complainant-company m/s. cadchem laboratories limited under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (for short hereinafter referred to as the c.p. act) claiming compensation for business loss, for mental harassment and agony to the tune of rs. 2,50,000/-. apart from the ..... and corporation, trading within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the court concerned, may take a plea of section 86, although prima facie it appears that such company or corporation is liable to be sued for any act or omission on their part or for any breach of the terms of the contract entered on their behalf. it .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... . m/s. usha international limited, lalli niwas, g.t. road, jallandhar through its joint commercial manager, shri kulbhushan chhura filed appeal under section 15 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (for short hereinafter referred to as the c.p. act) against order dated 6.7.2000 passed by the district forum-ii, u.t., chandigarh and impleaded the complainant col. d.c. sood ..... order before the district forum-ii, but the said application was dismissed vide order dated 19.8.2000 on the ground that there was no provision under the c.p. act for setting aside the ex parte order. a copy of the order was placed on record as annexure a-1. it was also mentioned in the ground of appeal that .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... a right to enter into possession of the immovable property leased to him. an agreement to lease in creating a present demise is not a lease. 14. section 107 of the transfer of property act provides about the allegation of the lease and inter alia, lays down as under : 107. a lease of immovable property from year to year, or for any ..... . the complainant/respondent has claimed watch and ward charges as incidental to the lease of cycle shed to the complainant/respondent. 12. the lease is defined under section 105 of the transfer of property act as under : 105. a lease of immovable property is a transfer of a right to enjoy such property, made for a certain time, express or implied, or ..... first4 yearsrs. 80.00(iv)ist instalmentrs. 230.00(v)any other amountrs. -total (ii) to (v)rs. 5,740.00less:(vi)amount already paid (subject to confirmation of accounts section of the board)rs. 1,200.00(vii)net payablers. 4,540.00 (a) an affidavit in the enclosed form on a non-judicial stamp paper of rs. 3.00 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... the quality of material allegedly used in the construction of the building. apart from it, reference was made to the definition of service as contained in section 2(1)(o) of the c.p. act, which reads as under : 2(1)(o). service means service of any description which is made available to potential users and includes the provision of ..... the opposite party no. 1 and the complainant and the same is excluded from the definition of service under section 2(1)(o) of the c.p. act and as such this case would not lie under the provisions of c.p. act. the cumulative effect of all these contentions and the involving of the intricate and complicate questions of facts, leading ..... k.k. srivastava, president: 1. this is a complaint filed under sections 12, 13 and 14 of the consumer protection act, 1986 [for short hereinafter referred to as the c.p. act] for refund of a sum of rs. 6,60,000/- on account of deficient services rendered by the opposite parties - shri baldev singh pabla and shri g.p. singh .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
K.K. Srivastava, President: 1. The complainant Mr. Yoginder Beri, a resident of House No. 5155/3, Modern Housing Complex, Manimajra, Chandigarh approached opposite party No. 2 Dr. Rohit Grover of Grover Eye and ENT Hospital, Kothi No. 140, Sector 35-A, Chandigarh (opposite party No. 1) for treatment of problem in his eyes. The opposite party No. 2 Dr. Rohit Grover after thoroughly checking the eyes of the complainant Mr. Yoginder Beri apprised him that he was having a Cataract in both his eyes and advised him for operation on urgent basis. The operation was to be done for PHACO EMULSIFICATION i.e., by implanting Intra Ocular Lens (for short to be referred as I.O.L.). The complainant had consulted Dr. Rohit Grover on 2nd May, 1997 for finalising the date of operation which was fixed for 27.5.1997 at 6.30 a.m. It has been alleged in the complaint that opposite party No. 2 Dr. Rohit Grover had assured the complainant that PHACO type of mode of Cataract operation was the latest of all the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
K.K. Srivastava, President: 1. This appeal has been filed by M/s. Weigh Well India and Sh. S.C. Verma partner of appellant No. 1 - M/s. Weigh Well India against the order dated 8.6.2000 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (for short hereinafter referred to as the District Forum-II) in Complaint Case No. 350 of 1996 filed by the respondent - M/s. Aggarwal Steel Industries, 172, Phase II, Industrial Area, Chandigarh. The District Forum-II has proceeded ex-parte against the appellants and decided the complaint case accordingly. The District Forum-II has allowed the complaint with consolidated costs for Rs. 500/- with a direction to the opposite parties to refund a sum of Rs. 1,92,000/- as a price of the machine and take back the defective machine from the complainant. The interest on the amount of Rs. 1,92,000/- was allowed at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of complaint to the date of payment. 2. Notice of the appeal was issued to the res...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... (1)(h) of the said policy, which states as under : section - vi television set the company will indemnify the insured in respect to 1. loss of or damage to television apparatus described in the schedule whilst contained or fixed in the insured premises by, (a) fire lightening, explosion of gas in domestic appliances; (b) bursting and overflowing of water tanks, apparatus or ..... dr. p.k. vasudeva, member: 1. this appeal has been filed under section 15 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (for short hereinafter referred to as the act) against the order dated 11.5.2000 passed in complaint case no. 637 of 1995 by district consumer disputes redressal forum-i, u.t., chandigarh. shri satish sharma appellant/complainant .....
Tag this Judgment!