Panipat District Commission Holds PNB Liable For Wrongful Repudiation Of Personal Accidental Insurance Claim Worth Rs. 18 Lakh

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panipat (Haryana) bench comprising Dr R.K. Dogra (President) and Dr. Rekha Chaudhary (Member) held Punjab National Bank liable of deficiency in services for false repudiation of claim made by the Complainant as legal heir of her husband. The bench directed PNB to pay the claim of Rs. 18,00,000/- to the Complainant and pay a compensation...

Surveyor's Report Can't Be Disregarded Without Valid Reasons, Delhi State Commission Dismisses Appeal Against National Insurance Co. Ltd.

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi bench comprising Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal (President) and Pinki (Member) dismissed an appeal against the National Insurance Company Ltd. The State Commission concluded that the Insurance Company rightly repudiated the insurance claim covering burglary risk by acting upon the surveyor's report as it is. The Appellant failed...

Unreasonable Deductions Under The Name Of 'Consolidated Charges', New Delhi District Commission Holds Axis Bank Liable For Unfair Trade Practices

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-VI, New Delhi bench comprising Poonam Chaudhry (President), Bariq Ahmad (Member) and Shekhar Chandra (Member) held Axis Bank Ltd. liable of unfair trade practices for arbitrable deduction of “Consolidated Charges” from the Complainant's bank account without providing adequate notice and satisfactory reasons. The bench directed the...

REAT Delhi: While Exercising Its Authority Through Suo-Motu Proceedings, RERA Must Inform The Concerned Party Of The Alleged Violations

While setting aside the order and penalty imposed by the Delhi Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA or Authority), the Delhi Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (REAT or Tribunal) bench comprising of Justice Chander Shekhar (Chairperson), Lorren Bamniyal (Judicial Member), and Sheo Pratap Singh (Technical Member), has held that RERA, while exercising its authority against a promoter or any...

Karnataka HC Directs State Government To Appoint Chairperson And Members To Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal

The Karnataka High Court bench comprising of Justice M. Nagaprasanna has directed the State government of Karnataka to expeditiously appoint chairperson and members to Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (REAT), which has become non-functional due to these vacant posts. Background Facts On 17.03.21, the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) issued certain directions...

Sudden Car Breakdown Due To Defective Engine, Chandigarh State Commission Dismisses Appeal by Ford India

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Mrs Padma Pandey (Presiding Member) and Preetinder Singh (Member) dismissed an appeal filed by Ford against the Chandigarh District Commission's order which directed it to refund or replace a defective Ford Mustang Car. The defective engine of the car led to a sudden breakdown, causing a traffic jam...

UP RERA Mandates Real Estate Agents To Undergo Compulsory Training And Certification

In a significant step towards improving professionalism within the Real Estate Sector, the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) has issued an office order mandating compulsory Training and Certification Courses for real estate agents. This order applies to both newly registering real estate agents and those already registered with UPRERA, requiring them to complete...

Bangalore District Commission Holds Standard Chartered Bank And Shaha Finlease Liable For Demanding Credit Card Due Despite Final Settlement

The Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Bangalore (Karnataka) bench comprising B. Narayanappa (President), Jyothi N (Member) and Sharavathi S.M (Member) held Standard Chartered Bank and Shaha Finlease Pvt. Ltd liable for deficiency in services for demanding money from the Complainant to settle the Credit Card due despite him paying Rs. 15,500/- for full and...

Once Insolvency Proceedings Are Initiated, NCLT Would Adjudicate On Consumer Claims; Punjab State Commission Dismisses Appeal Against Jet Airways

The Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission adjudicated a dispute concerning the cancellation of the flight run by Jet Airways and booked through Make My Trip after insolvency proceedings had been initiated against Jet Airways under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The State Commission set aside the order of the District Commission and held that the District Commission...

Failure To Return Pledged Property Documents Upon Repayment Of Loan, Bangalore District Commission Holds Central Bank of India Liable

The Bangalore I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising B. Narayanappa (President), Jyothi N (Member) and Sharavathi SM (Member) held the Central Bank of India liable for deficiency in services for failure to return the property documents submitted as pledge by the Complainants. The bench directed the bank to pay a compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- along...

Amritsar District Commission Holds Videocon Liable For Deficiency In Service For Selling Defective LED TV And Failure To Resolve Issues

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar (Punjab) bench comprising Jagdishwar Kumar Chopra (President) and Mandeep Kaur (Member) held Videocon liable for deficiency in services for failure to replace the LED TV which malfunctioned within the warranty period. The bench directed Videocon to replace the LED TV or pay the sale price of Rs. 49,800/- to the Complainant and...

Banks Ought To Reverse Unauthorized Transactions If Informed Within 3 Days, Chandigarh District Commission Holds Standard Chartered Bank Liable

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh bench comprising Mr Amrinder Singh Sidhu (President) and Mr S.K. Sardana (Member) held Standard Chartered Bank for failure to reverse a series of unauthorized transactions totalling Rs. 2,60,000/-. The Bank could not prove any negligence on the Complainant's part. Further, the Complainant informed the bank...