Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... while the original service connection holders were residing in different places at vellore and salem for the purpose of agriculture use of irrigation of water and sago factory lighting and for other things, the consumption of energy was used and apart from that by using half hp for bore well for the agricultural purpose and after fixing of new meter with digital system, the complainant used 7 hp meter to draw water for irrigation ..... exhibit b17 is the data of recording of energy at the opposite parties filled by electronic computerized automatic reading for every half an hour with all the details of load factor supply, use of energy etc. ..... besides the complainants are using for the electricity for sago factory and for the purpose of agriculture use of irrigation of water and sago factory lighting and using other things. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... the opposite party had taken half load of sand and absconded. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... half-yearly premium payable was rs.4,020/-. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... the complaint to the bar council the opposite party sent the letter for sending back the records and thereby he caused lot of trouble to the complainant as his wife had taken steps for forfeiting half of his property due to the deficiency of service by the opposite party and thereby there was mental agony and the complainant has come forward with this complaint. 4. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... that is why as pleaded, they requested the bank to play the video footage, to see whether the same could throw light on the lost red folder. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
(the 1st respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the district forum, against the opposite parties praying for the direction to the opposite parties to pay a sum of rs.35,000/- towards mental agony undergone by the complainant and to pay a sum of rs.15,000/- towards the insured amount to the complainant. the district forum allowed the complaint, against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the district forum dated 5.7.10 in c.c.no.141/2009. the appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 30.3.2012, upon hearing the arguments of both sides and perused the documents, written submissions as well as the order of the district forum, this commission made the following order :-) a.k.annamalai, judicial member 1. 2nd opposite party is the appellant. 2. the complainant had insured her milch cow with the 2nd opposite party for rs.15,000/- through the kalleripatty, karaikalam women self help group and obtained loan from the 1st opposite party. the 2nd opposite party issued insurance number by way of ear tag no.67379 after making the tag tied with the ear of the complainants cow. the cow suddenly died on 13.4.09 and the complainant claimed the insured amount for the same and after following the formalities, the 2nd opposite party repudiated the claim by stating that the tag no.67379 was not submitted by the complainant and the complainant stated that the tag was lost when the cow was in the grazing place which was not aware of by the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... as already noted, the complaint is full of half truths, falsehood and terminological inexactitudes. ..... the complaint itself is full of falsehood, half truths and terminological inexactitudes. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
the 1strespondent/complainant filed a complaint before the district forum, dindigul, alleging deficiency against the opposite parties to pay the lost cheque amount of rs.7,00,000/- and rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and rsw.1,45,000/- as compensation for deficiency of service and cost of the complaint. the district forum allowed the complaint against the opposite parties. against the said order, this appeal is preferred by opposite parties, praying to set aside the order of the district forum, dindigul, dt.11.02.2008 in cc.no.22/2006. this appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 04.02.2011, upon hearing the arguments of the counsel on bothsides, and perused the documents, written submissions as well as the order of the district forum, this commission made the following order :- common order a.k.annamalai, presiding member judicial f.a. no.335/2008 : the 3rd opposite party is the appellant. f.a. no.308/2010 : the 1st and 2nd opposite parties are the appellants. 1. details of complaint in both the appellants :- the complainant chinnadurai who is the 1st respondent in both appeals has filed a complaint against the appellants in cop no.22/2006 before the district consumer disputes redressal forum, dindigul for the deficiency of service, claiming rs.7,00,000/- for the loss of the cheque presented for collection with the 1st opposite party and for rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and for rs.1,45,000/- for deficiency of service and cost. 2. the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
j. jayaram, judicial member this appeal is filed by the complainant against the order of the district consumer disputes redressal forum, chennai [north] in c.c.82/2008, dated 01-08-2011, dismissing the complaint. 2. the case of the complainant is that he purchased a singer fashion sewing machine from the opposite party for rs.8,100/- on 22-3-2007. right from the day of purchase, the sewing machine developed certain problems due to the inherent defects in the machine. he brought it to the knowledge of the opposite party and their mechanic attended to the repair works; but even then certain defects could not be rectified though the complainant approached the opposite party several times. the defects are inherent manufacturing defects in nature. this amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and hence the complaint praying for direction to the opposite party to pay compensation under several heads. 3. according to the opposite party, the complainant was satisfied with the demonstration of the machine and after being satisfied with the demonstration only he purchased the machine and the problem in the sewing machine is due to improper handling and faulty operation of the same by the complainant, and on being informed that the machine developed certain defects, the opposite partys mechanic repaired the same and set it right, and on rectifying the defects, the complainant refused to sign the memo and at last, the opposite party contacted the complainant and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
..... having this pleading in mind, if we see the definition for consumer, it is seen, as day light, that he will not come within the meaning of consumer since section 2(d)(i) says but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose . .....
Tag this Judgment!