Uttaranchal Court March 2014 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
icici Lombard General Insurance Company Limited Having Its Registered ...
Court: Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Dehradun
Decided on: Mar-28-2014
B.C. Kandpal, President, J. 1. This appeal, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, has been preferred against the order dated 04.12.2009 passed by the District Forum, Nainital in consumer complaint No. 30 of 2008, whereby the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint against the appellant “ opposite party No. 1 and directed the appellant “ opposite party No. 1 to pay to the respondent “ complainant the balance amount of Rs. 2,51,665/- together with litigation expenses of Rs. 2,000/-, within a month from the date of the order, failing which the appellant was also held liable to pay interest @6% p.a. on the above amount from the date of the order till payment. The consumer complaint was, however, dismissed against the opposite party No. 2. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the complainant was the registered owner of car No. DL3C-AJ-6733. The said car was insured with the appellant “ ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Li...
Gurukul Kangri Vishwa Vidyala Haridwar Vs. Ankit Walia, Haridwar
Court: Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Dehradun
Decided on: Mar-27-2014
C.C. Pant, Member: 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 22.02.2013 passed by the District Forum, Haridwar in consumer complaint No. 342 of 2010, thereby allowing the consumer complaint and directing the opposite party to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 1,30,000/- within a month from the date of the order, failing which the opposite party has also been held liable to pay interest on the said amount @ 5% per annum from the date of filing the consumer complaint till payment. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that one Sh. Ankit Walia“ complainant took admission in the first year of M.B.A. course conducted by Gurukul Kangri University (for short œUniversity?)“opposite party for the academic session 2009-10 and deposited a total sum of Rs. 1,28,115/- with the University against tuition fee and other various heads. However, the complainant left the studies immediately after the start of the academic session and requested the authorities of the Univers...
Mani Ram Semalti Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Through General Mana ...
Court: Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Dehradun
Decided on: Mar-26-2014
B.C. Kandpal, President: 1. This appeal, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, is directed by the complainant against the order dated 12.01.2010 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun in consumer complaint No. 88 of 2009, thereby disposing of the consumer complaint filed by the complainant and referring the dispute raised by the complainant to the Arbitrator to be appointed by the service provider in view of Sub-section (1) of Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as mentioned in the consumer complaint, are that in the month of December, 2006, the complainant shifted from the government accommodation provided to him to his own house situated at 70/1, Kalidas Road, Dehradun and got his landline connection No. 2740972 transferred to his house. It is alleged that the telephone department installed the telephone at the house of the complainant without any underground cable, on account whereof, the telephone did not work prop...
Managing Director Sahkari Samiti, Haridwar Vs. Ratan Singh
Court: Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Dehradun
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
C.C. Pant, Member: 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.02.2011 passed by the District Forum, Haridwar in consumer complaint No. 282 of 2010, whereby the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and has directed the opposite party to issue the receipt to the complainant for a deposit of Rs. 50,000/- made by him and to return his pass-book to him, after making the entry of the said deposit in it, within a month from the date of the order. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that one Sh. Ratan Singh“ complainant has alleged that he had deposited a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with Sahkari Samiti, Aithal Bujurg, Baharabad Khadar, Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar “ opposite party, but the opposite party did not issue any receipt to him. The complainant has also alleged that the pass-book is also with the opposite party. According to the complainant, he sent registered notice to the opposite party in this regard, but to no avail. This led the co...
Telecom District Engineer, Dehradun Vs. Baljeet Singh Sethi
Court: Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Dehradun
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
C.C. Pant, Member: 1. This is service providers appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 06.12.1994 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun in consumer complaint No. 607 of 1994. Vide its order, the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and has directed the service provider to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 2,500/- as compensation and Rs. 250/- towards litigation expenses and to give rebate in rent for a period of five months and also to adjust the same in future bills. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainant-Sh. Baljeet Singh Sethi had taken a telephone connection No. 27470 from the Telecom Department “ opposite party for his residence. The complainant has alleged that the said connection was lying dead since 20.07.1993. The complainant lodged a complaint with the opposite party, but the opposite party put it in order only on 15.02.1994. Again, it went out of order on 11.03.1994. As per the complain...
Kalpana Joshi Vs. Pradeep Kumar Joshi
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Mar-21-2014
Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard learned counsel for the review applicant on the delay condonation application. I find sufficient ground to allow the delay condonation application. Accordingly, the delay condonation application in filing the review application is hereby allowed. Also heard on the review application. A suit for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was filed by the husband/respondent at Champawat. The wife/applicant presently staying in Haridwar, and therefore, sought transfer of the case from the District Champawat to the District Haridwar. On her transfer application notice was issued by this Court vide order dated 08.08.2013, which reads as under:- œMr. Sanjay Bhatt, Advocate, present for the applicant. Issue notice to respondent Pradeep Kumar Joshi. List immediately after service of notice on the respondent. The applicant is allowed to get the notice served DASTI, and file affidavit of service, in addition to normal mode of service.? Since there w...
Life Insurance Corporation of India, Through Branch Manager Vs. Shyam ...
Court: Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Dehradun
Decided on: Mar-20-2014
B.C. Kandpal, President: 1. This appeal, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, is directed against the order dated 22.07.2010 passed by the District Forum, Haridwar in consumer complaint No. 359 of 2008, whereby the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and directed the appellant “ opposite party to pay the insured amount to the respondent “ complainant together with Rs.10,000/- towards damages. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as mentioned in the consumer complaint, are that during his lifetime, late Sh. Nathi Ram, the deceased husband of the complainant “ Smt. Shyam Lata Chauhan, had purchased life insurance policy for assured sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on 28.01.2003 and purchased another life insurance policy for assured sum of Rs.1,50,000/- on 28.01.2004. The complainant was the nominee under both the policies. The premium of the said policies was paid by the life assured well in time and both the policies were alive. However, the li...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Dehradun Vs. Ritu Shah
Court: Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Dehradun
Decided on: Mar-19-2014
C.C. Pant, Member: 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 24.07.2012 passed by the District Forum, Nainital in consumer complaint No. 111 of 2008, whereby the District Forum has partly allowed the consumer complaint and has directed the opposite party to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 1,29,050/- as compensation together with interest @ 6% per annum on the said amount pendente lite and future within a month from the date of the order and Rs. 3,000/- towards cost of litigation. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainant Smt. Ritu Shah is the registered owner of a commercial vehicle bearing registration No. UA04- D-1344. She got this vehicle comprehensively insured with National Insurance Co. Ltd. “ opposite party for the period from 05.05.2007 to 04.05.2008 at an IDV of Rs. 4,80,000/-. On 20.01.2008, when the insured vehicle was returning from Rai Bareilly to Nainital, it met with an accident and got badly damaged. An FIR was lodged with Police St...
Sumer Chand Maurya Vs. the Principal Subhash Chandra Bose Academy
Court: Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Dehradun
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
C.C. Pant, Member: 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 13.06.2011 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun, in consumer complaint No. 88 of 2010, whereby the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint against the opposite parties and has directed them to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 10,575/- within a month from the date of the order, failing which the complainant has also been held entitled to interest @ 9% per annum on the above amount from the date of filing the consumer complaint till payment. The opposite parties were also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- to the complainant towards litigation expenses and mental agony. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainant “ Sh. Sumer Chand Maurya had got his daughter Km. Alpana Maurya admitted in Subhash Chandra Bose Academy, Vill. and P.O. Nathuwawala, Raipur, Dehradun in the year 2006 in Class 8th and had deposited the admission fee along with other expenses. The complainants daughter ...
Praveen Kumari and Others Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. The petitioners are the B.T.C. trained candidates and they have challenged the order dated 4th March, 2014 passed by the Principal Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand, whereby œShiksha Mitras? have been exempted from qualifying a test, which is known as œTeachers Eligibility Test?, in other words such persons can be appointed as teachers in primary schools, even if they have not passed the Teachers Eligibility Test. The petitioners on the other hand have to qualify such test for being appointed as primary school teachers. 2. After the Right to Elementary Education was included as a fundamental right in Part III of the Constitution of India as Article 21-A, the Parliament has enacted a legislation i.e. Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. In pursuance of the Act, a Government of India body i.e. National Council for Teacher Education was delegated with the authority to frame guidelines regarding the eligibility of teach...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »