Consumer Cases
Not Advisable To Intervene In Matters Lacking Anti-Competitive Conduct, CCI Dismisses complaint against Pharma Entities
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) bench, consisting of Ms Ravneet Kaur (Chairperson), Mr Anil Agrawal (Member), Ms Sweta Kakkad (Member), and Mr Deepak Anurag (Member), held that in the absence of evident anti-competitive behaviour, decisions concerning the purchase or sale of products are primarily influenced by the commercial considerations of market players. Consequently, the...
Section 24 A Aims To Uphold The Consumer Protection Act 1986, Ensuring Its Effectiveness By Preventing Prolonged Litigation In Consumer Fora: NCDRC
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra and Dr. Sadhna Shanker(member), held that Section 24 A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, serves as a safeguard to the effectiveness of the law by preventing challenges that could unnecessarily prolong cases in Consumer Fora, thus preserving the integrity of the legislation. Brief Facts of the...
Bihar State Commission Sets Aside Order Against SBI Based On Lack Of Technical Issues Pertaining To ATMs On Its Part
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (Bihar) bench comprising Ms Gita Verma (Presiding Member) and Md. Shamim Akhtar (Judicial Member) set aside the order of the Vaishali District Commission against the State Bank of India. The State Commission found discrepancies in the Complainant's version, who alleged unauthorized transactions while using SBI's ATMs. Brief...
Chandigarh District Commission Holds Byju's Liable For Failure To Provide Refund Despite Providing Acknowledgement
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench, consisting of Shri Pawanjit Singh (President), Mrs. Surjeet Kaur (Member), and Shri Suresh Kumar Sardana (Member), held Byju's liable for failing to deliver the promised amenities in a course and subsequently, failing to refund the amount despite acknowledging it. Brief Facts: The Complainant, having...
The National Commission Holds Emaar Land Liable For Deficiency In Service Due To Delay In Possession
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Justice A.P. Sahi, held that buyers cannot be made to wait indefinitely for possession when projects are not completed on time. Brief Facts of the Case The complainant booked an apartment from Emaar Land Ltd./ developer and paid Rs. 40,56,443. The agreement stipulated possession within 36 months from the...
Compensation For Delays Are Subject To Market Conditions: NCDRC Holds Eldeco Infrastructure Liable For Deficiency In Service
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra and Dr. Sadhna Shanker(member), held that the interest rate charged for delay in possession may be altered according to market conditions. Brief Facts of the Case The case involves a dispute between the complainant and the builder company regarding purchasing an independent floor unit in...
The National Commission Holds Premium Acres Infrastructure Liable For Deficiency In Service Due To Arbitrarily Cancelling Allotment
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra and Dr. Sadhna Shanker(member), held the builder's failure to deliver the flat on time constituted a clear deficiency, which was worsened by arbitrarily cancelling the allotment upon receiving a legal notice from the complainant. Brief Facts of the Case The complainant booked a flat in the...
Consumer Cases Monthly Digest: April 2024
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) Non-Standard Basis Of Settling Insurance Claims Apply To Both Private And Public Insurance Companies, NCDRC Holds Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Liable The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) bench comprising Justice Sudip Ahluwalia (Presiding Member) held that the guidelines to settle an insurance...
Mere Allegations Of A Property Being Bought For Commercial Intent Is Not A Ground For Rejecting A Consumer Complaint: Delhi State Commission
Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, headed by Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal alongside member Ms. Pinaki, held Parvsnath Developer liable for deficiency in service due to failure to hand over the possession of the purchased property to the buyer for more than 13 years. The Commission also ruled that mere verbal claims without supporting documentation are...
Delhi State Commission Holds Regal Emporio Liable For Deficiency In Service For Falsely Assuring Completion Of A Project And Retaining The Complainant's Money.
Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, headed by Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal alongside member Ms. Pinaki, held that a company bears sole responsibility for completing the construction within the agreed-upon time-frame, ensuring the complainant does not bear the consequences of their deficiencies. Brief Facts of the Case The complainant leased a shop from M/S...
TNREAT - Appeal Before Appellate Tribunal Without Depositing Corpus Fund Is Not Maintainable
Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (TNREAT) bench comprising of Justice M. Duraiswamy (Chairperson) and R. Padmanabhan (Judicial Member), has held that an appeal filed before the Appellate Tribunal without depositing the Corpus Fund as stipulated under Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 is not maintainable. In real estate, the Corpus Fund is...
The National Commission Cannot Interfere With The Concurrent Findings Of Lower Forum Unless There's Evidence Of Legal Misconduct: NCDRC
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by AVM J. Rajendra, held that the National Commission can only intervene in cases if it finds that the State Commission has acted beyond its jurisdiction and failed to exercise its jurisdiction. Brief Facts of the Case The complainant's wife, employed at M/s Bagrrys India Ltd Bhatoli Kalan Baddi, underwent regular...