Malfunctioning Of Phone Within 1 Year Of Purchase, Hyderabad District Commission Holds Realme Liable For Deficiency In Service

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission – I, Hyderabad (Telangana) bench comprising B. Uma Venkata Subba Lakshmi (President) and B. Rajareddy (Member) held Realme liable for deficiency in services for selling a mobile phone which started experiencing issues with battery backup and display within one year of the purchase. The bench directed it to refund the amount of...

Gurgaon District Commission Holds Zudio Solutions Liable For Charging Rs. 10 For Carry Bag, Orders Rs. 15,000 Compensation, Rs. 11k Legal Costs

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurgaon (Haryana) bench comprising Sanjeev Jindal (President), Jyoti Siwach (Member) and Khuswinder Kaur (Member) held Zudio Solutions liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for charging Rs. 10/- for the carry bag from the Complainant. The bench directed Zudio Studios to refund Rs. 10/- to the Complainant and...

Recurring Defects In Newly Purchased Laptop, Hyderabad District Commission Orders Lenovo To Refund Purchase Amount And Pay Compensation

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission – I, Hyderabad (Telangana) bench comprising B. Uma Venkata Subba Lakshmi (President) and C. Lakshmi Prasanna (Member) held Lenovo India liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for selling a defective product to the Complainant. The bench directed it to pay the price of the laptop of Rs. 61,441/- to the Complainant...

Flight Cancellation And No Support To Passenger, New Delhi District Commission Holds Air India Liable

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, New Delhi bench comprising Monika A Srivastava (President), Kiran Kaushal (Member) and UK Tyagi (Member) held Air India Limited liable for deficiency in services and negligence for failure to provide compensation to the Complainants after the cancellation of the flight 25 minutes before the departure. The bench directed the airline to...

Wrongful Deduction Of Money From Credit Account, Jaipur District Commission Holds SBI Liable For Deficiency In Service

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Jaipur (Rajasthan) bench comprising Shri Subesingh Yadav (President) and Shrimati Neelam Sharma (Member) held State Bank of India (SBI) liable for deficiency in service for wrongfully deducting money from the Complainant's account and failing to resolve the issue. Brief Facts: The Complainant had a credit card issued by the...

Chandigarh District Commission Holds HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Liable For Wrongful Repudiation Of An Accidental Claim

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Pawanjit Singh (President) and Surjeet Kaur (Member) held HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Limited liable of deficiency in services for repudiation of a genuine claim where the Complainant was involved in an accident which resulted in complete loss of the vehicle and death of his helper. The...

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...