Ernakulam District Commission Holds Oneplus Liable For Failure To Provide Spare Parts

The Ernakulam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, headed by D.B. Binu as President, alongside members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia. T.N. held OnePlus over deficiency in service due to failure to provide the necessary spare parts for the product to address the defects. Brief Facts of the Case The complainant bought a TV from OnePlus/manufacturer from Flipkart, and...

Failure To Provide Preferred Bride Suggestions, Chandigarh District Commission Holds Wedding Wish Pvt. Ltd. Liable For Deficiency In Service

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held Wedding Wish liable of deficiency in services for failure to provide matching profiles to the Complainant which didn't align with his preferences. The bench directed it to refund Rs. 25,000/- to the Complainant along with a compensation of...

If Accidental Death Is Proven, Can't Reject Claim Based On Unnecessary Risk Taking, Maharashtra State Commission Holds Universal Sompo Insurance Co. Liable

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Aurangabad (Maharashtra) bench comprising Dr Nisha A. Chavhan (Member) and Nagesh C. Kumber (Member) held Universal Sompo General Insurance Company liable for wrongfully repudiating the claim for 'Gopinath Mundhe Farmers Insurance Scheme' held by a deceased daily wage worker. The State Commission held that once accidental death was...

Mahindra & Mahindra And Its Dealer Held Liable For Failure To Replace Rusted Car Parts Despite Valid Warranty, Bangalore District Commission Orders Compensation

The Bangalore I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising B. Narayanappa (President), Jyothi N (Member) and Sharavathi S.M. (Member) held Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. And its dealer liable for deficiency in service for failure to replace the rusted parts of the Complainant's car and rectify the defects free of cost under warranty. Brief Facts: Mr...

Failure To Replace Defective Phone Parts, Chandigarh District Commission Holds OnePlus And Its Service Provider Liable For Deficiency In Service

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held OnePlus and its service centre liable of deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for failure to provide a satisfactory solution to the genuine grievance of the Complainant for repair of the phone which was under warranty. The...

Wrongful Repudiation Of Insurance Despite Full Disclosures By Insured, Chandigarh District Commission Holds Kotak Mahindra Life Insurance Liable

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held Kotak Mahindra Life Insurance Company Ltd. liable for deficiency in services for repudiation of a genuine claim filed by the Complainant. The bench directed it to pay the claim amount of ₹ 79,90,953/- to the Complainant and pay a compensation...

Cancellation Of Bus An Hour Before Departure, Jodhpur District Commission Holds Travel Agency Liable

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Jodhpur (Rajasthan) bench comprising Shyam Sundar (President) and Balveer Khurkhuria (Member) held Shri Nathnama Travel Agency liable for cancelling the passenger's bus at the last moment without any justifiable reason. The passenger was left stranded and had to incur additional expenses. Brief Facts: Dr....

Hyderabad District Commission Holds LIC Liable For Repudiation Of Valid Claim Based On Insured's Subsequent Policy With Another Insurance Co.

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-III, Hyderabad (Telangana) bench comprising Sri M. Ram Gopal Reddy (President), Smt. J. Shyamala (Member) and Sri R. Narayan Reddy (Member) held Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) liable for deficiency in services. LIC repudiated a valid life insurance claim based on non-disclosure of the insured's subsequent policy with...

Failure To Block Credit Card Leading To Unauthorized Transactions, Jodhpur District Commission Holds ICICI Bank Liable

The District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (II), Jodhpur (Rajasthan) bench comprising Shyam Sundar (President) and Balveer Khudkhudia (Member) held ICICI bank liable for deficiency in services for failure to block the credit card after the Complainant asked the customer care which subsequently resulted in an unauthorized transaction of Rs. 32,640/- under the credit card. The...

Samsung Held Liable For Failure To Resolve Complainant's Issue With Redemption Of Coupon Code For Discounted Buds Pro On Its App

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kozhikode (Kerala) bench comprising Sri P.C. Paulachen (President), Smt. Priya S Bal (Member) and Sri V. Balakrishnan (Member) held Samsung liable for deficiency in service for its failure to provide resolution to the Complainant seeking to utilize a coupon code to buy Samsung Galaxy Buds Pro for a cheaper amount. The...

Consumer Forum Cannot Assume Jurisdiction When Special Statue Prescribes Arbitration; Calcutta High Court Set Aside West Bengal State Commission Order

The Calcutta High Court single bench of Justice Prasenjit Biswas held that consumer forum cannot assume jurisdiction when a special statue prescribes for arbitration and designates a forum for adjudication of disputes. It held that a special law takes precedence over a general law. Brief Facts: Jyotish Chandra Sarkar (“Complainant”) filed a complaint alleging that despite...

Onus To Prove That The Insurance Claim Is Payable Under The Policy Is On The Insured And Not The Insurer: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Justice Ram Surat Maurya (presiding member) and Bharatkumar Pandya(member), dismissed a review petition against Cholamandalam Insurance Company and held that it is the fundamental duty of the insured to prove that the insurance claim is payable under the insurance policy. Contentions of the Complainant The complainant,...