Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... user. however, since, the complainant was the beneficiary of the mobile set, thus, the learned district forum concluded that he was very much a consumer as defined under consumer protection act, 1986. on merits, the learned district forum has recorded that op no. 1 has not placed any evidence on record, which could prove that the mobile set was water logged ..... telephonically. as per the complainant, till the filing of complainant, he had received no information from op no. 1 regarding the repair and delivery of his handset. alleging the above act of ops to be a deficiency in service, this complaint had been filed seeking refund of price of the mobile set as well as compensation for mental tension and harassment .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... definition of heavy passenger motor vehicle because more or less it is a light motor vehicle. it is not heavy goods vehicle as defined under section 2(16) of motor vehicles act. it may be true that psv (public service vehicle) or transport endorsement was required if vehicle was passenger carrying vehicle coming under the definition ..... weight of either of which or a motor car or tractor or road-roller the unladen weight of any which, does not exceed 7500 kilograms. section 2(17) of motor vehicles act defines heavy passenger motor vehicle as any public service vehicle or private service vehicle or educational institution bus or omnibus, the gross vehicle weight of ..... insurance company. there is also no dispute about it that sh. pushpinder singh was driving the said jeep at the time of accident. 11. section 2(22) of motor vehicles act,1988 defines maxi cab as any motor vehicle constructed or adapted to carry more than six passengers, but not more than twelve passengers, excluding the driver .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
K.C. Gupta, President: 1. This appeal has been directed by the complainant against order dated 26.11.2008 passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T. Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as District Consumer Forum) whereby his complaint was dismissed as meritless. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that the appellant (complainant) entered into a loan agreement with the respondents for taking loan of Rs. 5,90,000 for purchasing vehicle @ 11.87% and the loan agreement was executed on 5.1.2008. He had paid Rs. 25,666 to Saluja Motors towards margin money but respondent No. 1 showed the same as two advance EMIs. It was also averred that in fact loan was taken @ 10.59% and not 11.87% and the amount of EMI was Rs. 2,154 and not 2,175 per lac. The appellant also mentioned certain other irregularities. 3. Alleging deficiency in service, complaint was filed. 4. Respondent No. 1 filed reply and stated that it had charged agreed rate of interest @ 11.87% monthly reducing as per agreement a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... 1998 to march 1999, there was less consumption as only a servant was residing in the premises in question and held the op guilty under sections 2(1)(g) and 2(1)(o) of consumer protection act, 1986. holding deficiency in service on the part of ops, the learned district forum directed him to revise bills exhibits c2 and c3 while taking .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Maj. Gen. S.P. Kapoor, Member: 1. This is an appeal against order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh (for short hereinafter to be referred as District Forum) dated 15.4.2008 passed in complaint case No. 172 of 2007 : Manmohan Singh Cheema v. The New India Assurance Company Limited and Another. 2. Briefly stated the Complainants case is that he took a Hospitalization and Domiciliary Hospitalization Benefit Policy from OP No. 1 on 21.2.2005. The policy was granted to him only after thorough scrutinizing of various medical test reports of the Complainant and after the OPs satisfied themselves about sound health of the Complainant. However, in the month of July 2005, the Complainant felt some urine problem and upon consulting Dr. D. S. Chadha, Urologist of Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, which is one of the networking hospitals of the OPs, he was advised an operation. The Complainant sent the required medical forms to the OPs through FAX and OP No. 2 advised t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Mrs. Devinderjit Dhatt, Member: 1. This appeal received by transfer from Haryana State Commission, under the orders of Honble National Commission has been filed against order dated 21.6.2001 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Karnal in complaint case No. 1281 of 1999. The contextual facts in brief are as under. 2. The respondent/complainant Sh. Atam Parkash is subscriber of electric connection under the agriculture category for a 5 BHP motor vide account No. B-783. It has been averred that charges were levied to the respondent/complainant on the flat rate basis, which as per rate in the revenue estate of Nilokheri is stated to be Rs. 50 per BHP. As per case set up by the complainant the electricity bill for the month of May, 1999 was issued to him charging a rate of Rs. 65 per BHP while the bills for months of June, July and August were issued showing a charge of Rs. 81 per BHP. The applicable rate was enhanced further in bill of September, 1999 as it was @ Rs. 136 p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... to be cleaned up for the next season. since the appellant/complainant have not been able to substantiate their allegation of deterioration of potatoes which could be attributed to any act or omission on the part of op their bald averments that the potatoes have got rotten due to improper cold storage facilities cannot be accepted as it is uncorroborated through ..... same in the cold storage and sell them when the prices reach on the higher side. thus the complainants cannot be accepted as consumers as per definition given in the act. the number of bags kept in cold store as stated in the complaint has been disputed. it is submitted that only the 250 bags of potatoes were stored. it is .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
..... appellate authority and sh.p.s.aujla, commissioner, municipal corporation exercising the powers of chief administrator, u.t.chandigarh under the provisions of the capital of punjab (development and regulation ) act,1952 vide order dated 25.5.2006 (annexure c-2) held that appellant no. 1 being an old lady was suffering at the hands of the staff of estate office .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
K.C. Gupta, President: 1. This appeal has been directed by the complainant against order dated 20.9.2007 passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, Union Territory, Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as District Consumer Forum), vide which his complaint was accepted and it was held that OP had failed to render proper service to the complainant as the defective windshield had caused much harassment and mental torture to him, so, the District Consumer Forum directed OP to replace the windshield with a new one having least distortion, within permissible limit and further to pay Rs. 10,000 as compensation for mental torture and harassment besides Rs. 2,100 as litigation expenses. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that Col. Shamsher Singh purchased an Innova model 2.5V car on 19.10.2005 from respondent No. 1 M/s. Pioneer Toyota for Rs. 8,66,582 vide Annexure C-1. On the same day appellant informed the sales Manager of respondent No. 1 that there was distortion in the front windshield ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
K.C. Gupta, President: 1. Briefly stated the facts are that Sh. Mandeep Sharma, husband of Mamta Manu had obtained two policies from Life Insurance Corporation of India bearing Nos. 162286651 and 160953055 dated 14.10.2002 and 15.9.1997 for the amounts of Rs. 5 lacs and Rs. 25,000 respectively. He was a healthy person and was never admitted to any hospital prior to getting these policies issued in his favour. 2. It was next averred that he had honestly disclosed vide Annexure C-1 that he took liquor occasionally. Thereafter, he was thoroughly examined by the doctors of LIC itself and was held to be fit for getting the policies. 3. It was further averred that on 19.1.2003 he complained of weakness and was admitted in the Government Medical College and Hospital, Sector-32, Chandigarh. He was diagnosed suffering from jaundice and after a week i.e. on 27.1.2003 he was discharged vide discharge slip Annexure C-3 and certain medicines were prescribed which he had regularly taken. 4. It was n...
Tag this Judgment!