Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
..... spent between the filing of the complaint before the district forum and the disposal of the appeal by this commission will be excluded under section 14 of the limitation act, 1963 in the light of the decision of the honble supreme court in trai foods ltd vs national insurance company ltd and others? reported in iii ( ..... the national commission held that the complainant, a share holder, cannot be the consumer within the meaning of section 2(1)(d) (ii) of the consumer protection act, 1986. though the complainant contended in the complaint that she purchased the shares for her livelihood, no where she clarified that she is an unemployee and invested the money ..... questionnaire furnished by the complainant and the replies given by the opposite parties and the opposite parties except stating as per mca (member constituent agreement) they have acted, nothing is placed to vouchsafe their actions. the documents in a series clearly show that she made deposits with opposite party no.1 firm to a tune .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
k. ranga rao, member: 1. this is a complaint filed under section 17(a)(i) of the consumer protection act, 1986 praying for directions to the opposite parties to pay a sum of rs. 1,50,000/- towards settlement of the insurance claim with interest @ 24% per annum, to pay .....
Tag this Judgment!