Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Nawab Singh, President (Oral): 1. This order shall dispose of afore-mentioned appeals because they have arisen out of the order dated September 30th, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Hisar, in complaint No.20 of 2013 filed by Braham Kumar. 2. First Appeal bearing No.862 of 2013 has been filed by State Farms Corporation of India Limited Jaipur, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to Opposite Party No.2) and Second Appeal bearing No.101 of 2014 has been filed by Braham Kumar (hereinafter referred to as Complainant). 3. Braham Kumar -complainant purchased four bags of Guar Seed (each containing 4 Kgs) of HG-563 variety on June 22nd, 2012 vide Cash Memo No.2420 (Exhibit C-1) for Rs.6400/- from Shiv Shakti Beej Bhandar-opposite party No.1. The seed was processed and prepared by State Farms Corporation of India Limited Jaipur-opposite party No.2. He sowed the seed in four acres of land and irrigated the same as per the instructions of the respond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. The complainant is a partnership firm run in the name and style M/s M.S Manufacturing Company, situated at Plot No.233, Rai, District Sonepat. It runs the business of manufacturing of Corrugated Boxes. The firm purchased Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy (Exhibit C-4) from the New India Insurance Co. Ltd (opposite parties) covering the period from 18thJune 2012 to 17thJune, 2013. Prior thereto also, the insurance policy was purchased from the opposite parties. The total insured amount was Rs.70.00 lacs (i.e. Rs.30.00 lacs for building-super structure, Rs.20.00 lacs for plant machinery and accessories and Rs.20.00 lacs for stock and stocks in process). In the insurance policy, there was Clause 4, that is, reinstatement of value policy clause. 2. On January 5th, 2013, at about 3.30 a.m. fire took place in the premises of the company. Fire tenders were called (Ex.C-11). The fire could be extinguished after about six hours. FIR (Ex.C-12) was got registe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Nawab Singh, President (Oral): 1. Sewa Samiti Charitable Hospital and Research Centre, Market No.1, NIT Faridabad “opposite party No.1 is in revision against the order dated January 15th, 2014 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Faridabad, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for dismissal of the complaint in view of the provision of Section 24-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the Act, 1986), was dismissed. 2. Smt. Malkeet Kaur-complainant filed complaint No.438 of 2010 before the District Forum under Section 12 of the Act, 1986 against the petitioner-opposite party No.1 and Asian Institute of Medical Sciences, Faridabad- opposite party No.2. 3. During the pendency of the complaint, learned counsel for the complainant made the following statement:- œStatement of Sh. N.P. Singh, Adv. Counsel for the complainant. Due to misunderstanding of medical terminology, the complainant has filed this complaint in ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Nawab Singh, President (Oral): 1. This appeal has been filed by Shriram General Insurance Company Limited (for short Insurance Company) against the order dated October 25th, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Panipat, whereby Joginder Singh-complainant (respondent) was granted benefits of insurance in respect of his motorcycle which was stolen during the subsistence of the insurance policy. For facilitation, the operative part of the order is reproduced as under:- œIn view of above discussion, present complaint succeeds. We hereby allowed the present complaint with a direction to opposite parties to pay Rs.32,500/- sum insured to the complainant with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the complaint till its realization. Cost of litigation quantified at Rs.2200/- is also allowed to be paid by opposite parties to the complainant. This order shall be complied within 30 days from the announcement of this order.? 2. Jogin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Nawab Singh, President (Oral): 1. Delay of 11 days in filing of the appeal is condoned. 2. This appeal has been filed by The New India Assurance Company Limited-opposite party (for short Assurance Company) against the order dated February 21st, 2014 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Gurgaon. 3. Randhir, aged about 27 years son of Rekha-complainant (respondent No.1) died in a road accident on February 25th, 2005. The First Information Report No.26 (Exhibit C-2) was immediately recorded in Police Station, Pataudi District Gurgaon. Postmortem Examination of the deceased was conducted vide report Exhibit C-3. The deceased left behind the complainant, that is, his wife aged about 24 years and a minor daughter aged about three months and fifteen days. His widow Rekha filed an application before the Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Haryana to grant her Rs.1.00 lac as per œCh. Devi Lal Jan Suraksha Bima Yojna? popularly known as &o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. Delay of seven days in filing of the appeal is condoned for the reasons stated in the application filed by the appellant. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated November 21st, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Palwal, whereby, complaint filed by Raj Kumar Sharma-complainant (respondent herein) alleging medical negligence and deficiency in service, was accepted in the following terms:- œOpposite party is directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint till the realization within 30 days to complainant which he spent on treatment. Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment alongwith Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses as well as Rs.2,000/- as traveling expenses within 30 days from the receipt of this order to the complainant.? 3. Raj Kumar Sharma-complainant was admitted in th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Nawab Singh, President (Oral): 1. The Director, ICL Institute of Managerment and Technology (hereinafter referred as appellant) is in appeal against the order dated December 17th, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Ambala. For facilitation, the operative part of the order is reproduced as under:- œ.the complaint is accepted and Op No.1 is directed to comply with the following directions:- (i) To refund Rs.32,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum w.e.f. 31.08.2012 i.e. the cut off date the withdrawal of admission, after deducting processing fee of Rs.1000/- as per Section 10 of All India Council for Technical Education Act 1987, till its actual realization. (ii) To pay the complainant an amount of Rs.10000/- in lump sum on account of causing mental harassment as well as costs of litigation etc incurred by the complainant. The aforesaid directions should be complied within 30 days of the receipt of copy of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. This appeal has been filed against the order dated June 12th, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Jhajjar. 2. Krishan Kadian-complainant (respondent) purchased a Booth/Shop No.17 situated in New Vegetable Market, Jhajjar in an open auction conducted by the appellants-opposite parties on December 18th, 2007 for a price of Rs.28,15,000/-. The respondent-complainant deposited Rs.07,03,750/- at the time of bid and the remaining amount of Rs.21,11,250/- was to be paid by him either in cash within 30 days or with interest at the rate of 15% per annum in six half yearly instalments or as may be specified by the appellant-Board. 3. The respondent-complainant gave an application for waiving off the interest on the instalments amount and the same was recommended by the appellant-opposite party No.1 but of no avail. 4. The respondent-complainant filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Nawab Singh, President (Oral): 1. This appeal has been filed by M/s R.K. Enterprises, Sonepat against the order dated January 23rd, 2014 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Sonepat. 2. Rambir-complainant (respondent No.1) purchased pesticide insecticides, that is, Shriram Badshah, Shriram Shera, Shriram Teezole, Devicyclin and Shriram Karzeb from M/s R.K. Enterprises-opposite party No.1 (appellant) on October 5th, 2010 for Rs.2340/- vide receipt Annexure-A. He sprayed the same in five acres of his paddy crop within the revenue state of Village Chitana Tehsil and District Sonepat, but due to defect in the insecticide, the crop was damaged. The complainant complained to the agriculture department upon which the Deputy Director Agriculture, Sonepat constituted a team of four agriculture officials, that is, Agriculture Development Officer, Chitana, Block Agriculture Officer, Sonepat, Subject Matter Specialist, Sonepat and APPO, Sonepat, directin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula
Nawab Singh, President (Oral): 1. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) has come up in appeal against the order dated October 24th, 2013 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short District Forum), Jhajjar, whereby, death benefits of Lal Chand (since deceased) under the policy alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of death of life assured, that is, March 26th, 2009, till its realization, Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses was awarded to Roshni Devi-complainant (respondent No.1 herein). 2. Lal Chand (since deceased) husband of respondent No.1 obtained three insurance policies bearing numbers 11272099 dated March 13th, 2009, 11376953 and 10838390 dated February 23rd, 2009. He died on March 26th, 2009. The claim lodged by the complainant with the appellant, was repudiated on the ground that the life assured concealed material facts in his proposal form that he was suffering from Chronic Myeloid Leuke...
Tag this Judgment!