Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... 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 pay a sum of rs.6,878.61 incurred by him, towards various ..... for going to delhi and coming back, as also compensation for mental agony and physical harassment, but to no avail. it was further stated that the aforesaid acts of the opposite party amounted to deficiency, in rendering service. on the final refusal of the opposite party, to redress the grievance of the complaint, left with ..... fro journey by the complainant, from chandigarh to delhi and back, on 27th and 28th nov., 2010. it was further stated that on account of the aforesaid acts of omission and commission of the opposite party, the complainant underwent a tremendous mental agony and physical harassment, as also suffered financial loss. the complainant requested the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... it was obligatory, on the part of 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 officials of the applicant/appellant, just slept over the matter, and did not take the requisite steps to file the appeal, in time. it ..... first question, that falls for consideration is, as to whether, there is sufficient cause for condonation of delay of 146 days, in filing the appeal, under section 15 of the act or not. 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 ..... of the instant order. 6. feeling aggrieved, the instant appeal, has been filed by the appellant/opposite party. 7. alongwith the appeal, an application under section 5 of the limitation act, for condonation of delay of 146 days, was filed by the applicant/appellant, wherein, it was stated that certified copy of the order impugned dated 26.06 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... being, in 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 scc385 and c.c.i chambers coop. ..... spinning mills (p) ltd., and anr., i (2010) cpj 4 (sc), a five judges bench, of the honble apex court, also held that, after the amendment of section 2(d) of the act w.e.f.15.03.2003, the services of the carriers, if had been availed of, for any commercial purpose, then the person availing of the services will ..... of a consumer, and, as such, the complaint was not maintainable. 14. the next question, which arises for consideration, is, as to whether, the complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection act, was maintainable or not before the district forum, on account of the arbitration clause no.17 of the terms and conditions of loan agreement (annexure c-2). with .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC UT Chandigarh
..... the time being, in force. the mere objection raised by the appellant/opposite party, 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 scc385 and c.c.i chambers coop. ..... spinning mills (p) ltd., and anr., i (2010) cpj 4 (sc), a five judges bench, of the honble apex court, also held that, after the amendment of section 2(d) of the act w.e.f.15.03.2003, the services of the carriers, if had been availed of, for any commercial purpose, then the person availing of the services will ..... of a consumer, and, as such, the complaint was not maintainable. 15. the next question, which arises for consideration, is, as to whether, the complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection act, was maintainable or not before the district forum, on account of specific objection that the dispute between the parties was in the nature of a suit for rendition .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... 36,953 which was paid by him under protest. 9. the next question would be whether the complainant is a consumer as defined under section 2(l) (d) of the act. the learned counsel for the ops has argued that the complainant is a company which is running its commercial business and the vehicle also was ..... as has been taken by opposite party no. l regarding maintainability of complaint that the complainant regency softech private ltd is a company incorporated under the companies act, 1956 and the complainant had acquired the said vehicle for commercial use in respect of the said business and, therefore, cannot be considered as consumer within ..... this complaint. 2. in its reply opposite party no. l took preliminary objection that the complainant, regency softech private ltd., is a company incorporated under the companies act, 1956 and the complainant had acquired the said vehicle for commercial use in respect of the said business and therefore, cannot be considered as consumer within the meaning .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... applicants/appellants, to enquire about the final outcome of the complaint, and then take immediate steps, by filing the appeal, within the stipulated period, as envisaged under section 15 of the act. it was, thus, a case of complete lack of bonafides and inaction, on the part of opposite parties no 1,2 and 3 (now appellants). the principle ..... . the district forum, however, proceeded to dispose of the complaint, on merits, under rule 4(8) of the chandigarh consumer protection rules, 1987, read with section 13(2) of the act (amended up-to-date), in the absence of opposite parties no.1,2 and 3(now appellants). this speaks volumes of the conduct of opposite parties no.1 ..... . the district forum, however, proceeded to dispose of the complaint, on merits, under rule 4(8) of the chandigarh consumer protection rules, 1987, read with section 13(2) of the act (amended up-to-date),in the absence of opposite parties no.1,2 and 3. after hearing the counsel for the complainant, as well as opposite party no .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... failed to refund the booking amount. 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 referred to as the act) was filed. 3. op-1 in its reply at the outset took preliminary objection that the complainant does not come within the ..... but the complainant refused to accept the same and demanded more. it was pleaded that the complainant was allotted unit no. 1008 on the 10th floor (commercial section) in the project of ops and after issuance of the allotment letter, the complainant could not seek refund of the booking amount. it was averred that as ..... and affidavit mentioned that the complainant had made an application for the purchase of a commercial property and, therefore, does not fall within the ambit of the act. the complainant, however, did not mention in his complaint if it was a commercial property booked by him and the learned district forum proceeded with the assumption .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... the sale of old maruti car. it was, under these circumstances, that the complainant sought no claim bonus. as per the definition of sale provided in the sales of goods act, the sale of movable property is complete, as soon as, the delivery of the same is made to the buyer, against consideration, fully paid or partly paid. the mere fact .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... said complaint. the complainant filed a criminal complaint before the court of the learned chief judicial magistrate at chandigarh against op nos. 1 to 4 on 15.11.2007 under sections 406/420/467/468/471 and120-b of the ipc. the said criminal complaint was pending before the court of sh. a.s. shergill, jmic, chandigarh for consideration on summoning ..... by the complainant after paying the premium of rs. 8,280 and further burdened with high rate of interest which the complainant is paying to op no. 4. the abovesaid act of ops amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. hence, the complaint was filed. 3. reply was filed by ops nos. 1 and 2 and admitted the factual .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... the view that admittedly the o.p. had failed to provide satisfactory service to the complainant and the case of the complainant is fully covered by the consumer protection act, 1986 under section 2(oo) spurious goods and services mean such goods and services which are claimed to be genuine but they are actually not so. in the present case, ..... anti-termite treatment had the o.p. used the desired quality of medicine/chemical then definitely the termites could not have reappeared again and again. hence, due to this act of the o.p. the complainant was required to be replaced the whole damaged wood work of his house. due to which, the complainant has suffered a lot of ..... physical and mental agony. therefore, the complainant is rightly compensated for this act of the o.p. 12. in view of the foregoing discussion, we do not find any ambiguity in the order passed by the learned district forum. the order passed .....
Tag this Judgment!