Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Pritam Pal, President: 1. This appeal by New India Assurance Company, one of opposite parties is directed against the order dated 13.7.2009 passed by District Consumer Forum-I, U.T. Chandigarh whereby the complaint filed by Sh. V.K. Bawa, respondent /complainant was allowed and appellant was directed to pay Rs. 34,956 as compensation and Rs. 5,000 as litigation expenses within thirty days from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which appellant was held liable to pay interest @ 12% p.a. with effect from 1.10.2008 (30 days after the report of Surveyor) till its payment. 2. The facts culminating to the commencement of this appeal may be recapitulated thus: The Maruti car of the complainant bearing registration No. CH03-P-8454 which was insured with OP-1 for the period from 5.7.2008 to 4.7.2009 met with an accident on 12.7.2008 and was got repaired from M/s. Sunil Autos through OP-1 by paying Rs. 49,712 as repair charges. However, the OP Insurance Company passed the claim fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Maj. Gen. S.P. Kapoor, Member: 1. This is an appeal against order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh (for short hereinafter to be referred as District Forum) dated 1.10.2008 passed in Complaint case No. 248 of 2008, Sh. Inderjit Aggarwal v. Central Government Health Scheme. 2. Briefly stated the case of the complainant is consequent to his retirement, he took a Health Policy from OP and the same was renewed every year. It was averred by the complainant that as per the said policy, he was entitled to get free medical treatment from approved hospitals along with medicines and in case of treatment being taken from any other hospitals, the amount spent on the treatment was to be reimbursed to him. As per the complainant, he was not supplied the copy of terms and conditions of the policy by the OP in spite of making number of requests. The case of the complainant is that in August 2005, he got his wife namely Promilla Aggarwal treated for her knees replacement...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Mrs. Neena Sandhu, Member: 1. This is an appeal filed by the complainant against the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, UT, Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as District Forum) dated 1.1.2009 passed in Complaint Case No. 868 of 2008. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant came to know through an advertisement in the newspaper about the OPs are dealing with herbal plants and as such the complainant transacted with them in purchasing the herbal plants. At the time of counselling, the OPs had agreed that on purchase of herbal plants, the complainant would be entitled to subsidy @ 30% from the National Medicinal Plant Board, which as per the OP was available upon the growth of herbal plants. It was also told that as their Firm being registered with the concerned Board would follow up the claim of subsidy and handover the cheque to the complainant. The OP had further agreed to charge @ Rs. 6 per plant with an assurance that in actual, the rate which wou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Pritam Pal, President: 1. This appeal by opposite party i.e. National Insurance Company Ltd. (hereinafter to be referred as OP) is directed against the order dated 23.7.2009 passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T. Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as District Consumer Forum) whereby complaint filed by respondent Shri Dev Raj Sharma, a senior citizen (hereinafter to be referred as complainant) was allowed in the following terms: The OP shall make the following payments to the complainant:(i)To pay a sum of Rs. 23,500 for the loss suffered by the complainant in respect of damage to the house building and households articles i.e. Rs. 26,000 less loss caused to the beddings (taken as 50% of the combined loss assessed for both clothes and beddings) as per the Expert Report dated 23.9.2008 given by a professional valuer.(ii)A sum of Rs. 2,000 paid by the complainant to the valuer for making fair assessment of the loss.(iii)A sum of Rs. 10,000 as compensation for mental hara...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Maj. Gen. S.P. Kapoor, Member: 1. Briefly stated the case of the complainants is that OP-1 through its channel partner i.e. OP-2 approached them for selling apartment measuring 1300 sq. ft. in the Housing Complex named Unitech Habitat situated at Plot No. 9, Ph-II, Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar (UP). The price of the apartment was quoted to be Rs. 39,65,000 approximately. It is further the case of complainants that OP further assured them that this was a pre-launch of the complex and the floor area of the apartment would not be in any case more than 1300 sq. ft. It was further averred that the complainants paid a sum of Rs. 5 lacs vide cheque dated 14.6.2006 and booked the apartment with a specific understanding given by the OPs that the apartment should not be more than 1300 sq. ft. and the price of the same would be Rs. 39,65,000. As per the complainants, they paid a total sum of Rs. 10,52,730 vide three different cheques, which were duly accepted by the OPs and for which receipts...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Mrs. Neena Sandhu, Member: 1. This is an appeal against the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh dated 7.10.2008 passed in Complaint Case No. 368 of 2008. The contextual facts in brief are as under. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondent/complainant is carrying on the business of fancy light and shandliers in a three-storeyed building, in the name and style of Deen Dayal and Sons. That the respondent/complainant purchased a policy under the scheme of Shop-keepers Insurance policy issued by the OPs vide No. 110702/48/06/34/00000463 from 30.11.2006 to 29.11.2007. While issuing the policy, the representative of the OPs inspected the shop and assessed the value. The requisite premium of Rs. 14,684 including service tax and stamp duty, etc. was paid to the OPs by the complainant. 3. It is averred that on the midnight of 12/13.6.2007 a wind storm lashed the city during which the goods lying in the shop were damaged, and due to which the complainan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Pritam Pal, President: 1. This appeal by Haryana State Electricity Board, etc. is directed against the order dated 24.7.2002 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sonepat (hereinafter to be referred as District Consumer Forum) whereby complaint filed by Sh.Ram Chander respondent was allowed partly and consequently appellants were directed to withdraw the electricity bill of Rs. 17,591 payable upto 6.5.1998 and the same time they were also directed to overhaul the account of respondent for the period from November,97 till the date of disputed period on the basis of taking the reading of consumed units for six months onwards from the date of replacement of defective meter. Further respondent was also granted Rs. 500 as litigation expenses. 2. In nutshell the facts culminating to the commencement of this appeal may be recapitulated thus : Sh. Ram Chander, complainant/respondent (hereinafter to be referred as complainant) is consumer of opposite parties/appellants (hereinafter t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Maj. Gen. S.P. Kapoor, Member: 1. This is an appeal against order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (for short hereinafter to be referred as District Forum) dated 10.2.2009 passed in Complaint Case No. 927 of 2008 : Sh. Akashdeep Singh v. UCO Bank. 2. Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that the Complainant in a roadside accident in 1998, became 100% disabled and since then he had been bed ridden. The father of the complainant, it was averred, stood as legal guardian of his son (complainant) through Court to pursue the cases and write other letters on his behalf. Thereafter, the complainant filed MACT case and the Court granted compensation to him and the said amount was directed to be deposited in some nationalized bank and it was further directed that interest of the same be given to the complainant for medication and other necessary items as he was bed ridden. Subsequently, in appeal, the Honble High Court directed the Insurance Company to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Maj. Gen. S.P. Kapoor, Member: 1. Vide this common order, we propose to dispose of three appeals received by transfer from Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission against the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rewari (for short hereinafter to be referred as District Forum) dated 29.7.2002 passed in respective complaint case No. 398 of 2001 : Sh. Surender Kumar v. Smt. Shashi; complaint case No. 401 of 2001 : Sh. Avtar Singh v. Smt. Shashi and complaint case No. 399 of 2001 : Sh. Sanjay Kumar v. Smt. Shashi. For the just decision of these three appeals which have similar facts involving same law points, facts are being extracted from complaint case filed by Sh. Surender Kumar i.e. complaint case No. 398 of 2001 as under: 2. In short, the case of the complainant is that in August 2000, the complainant took admission with the Computer Centre run by the OP in Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Science and Technology and deposited a fee amounting to Rs. 5,952. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh
Pritam Pal, President: 1. This appeal by opposite parties is directed against the order dated 27.5.2009 passed by District Consumer Forum-I, U.T. Chandigarh whereby complaint bearing No. 1390 of 2008 filed by the respondent/complainant was allowed and OPs were directed to refund him a sum of Rs. two lacs along with interest @ 8%p.a. since the date of deposit i.e. 23.10.2008 till payment. The amount was directed to be paid within thirty days, failing which OPs were made liable to pay costs of Rs. 5,000 with penal interest @ 12% p.a. on the total amount since the filing of complaint i.e. 21.11.2008 till payment. 2. The parties hereinafter shall be referred to as per their status before the District Consumer Forum. 3. In nutshell, the facts as set out in the complaint are that in response to the advertisement given by OPs for auction of residential as well as commercial sites on 23.1.2008 at Majlis Hall, Hotel Shivalik View, Sector 17, Chandigarh, the complainant being interested for a bo...
Tag this Judgment!