Court : Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Shimla
..... the amount of money by which it indemnifies the insured, by filing a suit, but it cannot seek the remedy by filing a complaint under the provisions of the consumer protection act, 1986 and, therefore, we feel that we do not have the jurisdiction to entertain, dwell upon and adjudicate, this question, which is interse the opposite parties. 20. in view ..... it, but lies against the seller and manufacturer of the vehicle. 3. complainant on receipt of letter, annexure r-6, aforesaid, filed a complaint, under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986, impleading insurer, i.e. opposite party no.1, the dealer from whom the vehicle was purchased, i.e. opposite party no.2 and the manufacturer of the vehicle, i ..... surjit singh, president (oral), j. (retd.). 1. complainant has filed the present complaint, under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986, seeking issuance of directions to the opposite parties to pay a sum of rs.4,71,000/- by way of insurance money, rs.12.00 lacs on account of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Shimla
..... the respondent. a legal notice was served on 23.02.2011 and that notice also, did not fetch any response. she filed a complaint, under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986, seeking a direction for refund of the price of suit length, besides seeking stitching charges, compensation for mental and physical harassment and litigation expenses. 3. appellant filed reply. it ..... singh, president (oral): 1. appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 30th october, 2013, of learned district consumer redressal forum, shimla, whereby a complaint, under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986, filed against it by respondent-narvada thakur, has been allowed and a direction given to it, to refund the price of suit length, to pay money equivalent to the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Shimla
..... , president (oral) 1. appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 21.10.2013, of learned district consumer disputes redressal forum, solan, whereby his complaint, under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986, which he filed against the respondent, seeking a direction to the respondent to pay rs.1,14,532/-, with interest at the rate of 18.5% on account of ..... /exercising. the form pertains to personal accident claim, as is apparent from the title itself. col. no.2 of the form reads state how it happened and what the insured/life insured was doing at the time?. it is against this column that the appellant wrote the words warming up/exercising?. 7. the very wording of printed query no.2 in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Shimla
..... complicated questions of facts that can be decided in summary proceedings by the fora below. hence in view of the judgement of apex court given supra foras under consumer protection act, 1986 are legally competent to decide the question of law and facts in summary manner. the relevant portion of the judgement is quoted in extenso:- 12. in ..... to their promise to replace the defective pavers at their costs on false and frivolous reasons. 4. in this background present complaint u/s 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 was filed for deficiency of service on the part of op. the complainant has contended that there was a deficiency in services of the opposite party wherein ..... complainant from the other sources can also be defective. the inter-locking pavers/tiles are made of material i.e. cement etc. which is consumable and perishables. the life of the pavers/tiles depends upon the mode of its use and method of fitting etc. and as such this complaint deserves to be dismissed 11. after hearing .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Shimla
..... clear deficiency of service/unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. 3. in this background, present complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 was filed for deficiency of service/unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties, wherein direction had been sought for paying the assured ..... attached with regard to the availing of medical leave and the disease from which the deceased was suffering. the provisions of evidence act are not applicable in the proceedings under the consumer protection act, 1986 in its letter and spiti whereas these documents have been supplied from the official custody of regional manager, hrtc, ..... kullu vide annexure rw.3 to the life insurance corporation of india, as such they cannot be legally discarded in toto. there is also .....
Tag this Judgment!