Government Employees Cannot Dispute Retirement Benefits In Consumer Forums: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Dr. Inder Jit Singh, held A government servant is not defined as a “consumer” under the Consumer Protection Act and is entitled to claim retirement benefits only according to service conditions and relevant regulations or statutory rules. Brief Facts of the Case The complainant was a clerk at the Punjab...

Insurer Cannot Repudiate Insurance Claim Based On Non-Disclosure After Issuing Policy: NCDRC Holds Care Health Insurance Liable For Deficiency In Service

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Dr. Inder Jit Singh, held that the insurer has a duty to seek complete details about the insured's medical condition and assess risks before issuing the insurance policy. If the insurer issues the policy after the insured has disclosed their existing medical conditions, even if some columns were left blank, the...

Pleading Ignorance No Defense For False Statements In Signed Insurance Proposal: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Dr. Inder Jit Singh, dismissed an appeal against Life Insurance Corporation and held that an insured who signs a proposal with false information cannot escape the consequences by claiming they signed without reading or understanding it. Brief Facts of the Case The complainant's husband obtained a life insurance...

Co-Promoters Liable To Refund Amounts Under Real Estate Laws: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Justice Ram Surat Maurya and Bharatkumar Pandya (member), held that shareholders are co-promoters under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act 1963, and according to the Real Estate Act 2016, the promoter is responsible for refunding amounts owed by other prompters. Brief Facts of the Case The complainant booked a...

Expert Report Mandatory To Prove Inherent Defect Under Section 13(1)(C): NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra, held that under Section 13(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, an expert's report is mandatory to determine if there is an inherent defect with a good and the burden of proof to prove the deficiency lies with the person alleging it. Brief Facts of the Case The complainant purchased a...

Disagreements Between Property Owners And Developers Do Not Justify Avoiding Contractual Commitments: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra and Dr. Sadhna Shanker (member), held that property disputes between owner and developer don't release parties from fulfilling contractual obligations towards the buyers. Brief Facts of the Case The Appellant's father, a landowner, entered into a Development Agreement with Respondent No.3/...

Forfeiture Of Amount In Case Of Breach Of Contract Must Be Reasonable: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra and Dr. Sadhna Shanker (member), held that when a contract is breached, the amount forfeited by the non-breaching party must be reasonable and proportionate. In the case of forfeiture of “earnest money” in a builder-buyer agreement, the amount was set to be 10% of the basic sale price. Brief Facts...

Party Who Has Not Acted Diligently Or Remained Inactive Is Not Entitled To Condonation Of Delay: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra and Dr. Sadhna Shanker(member), dismissed an appeal against St. Stephen's Hospital over delay in filing the appeal by the opposite party and held that that condonation of delay is not a right, and the applicant must show sufficient reasons for the delay. Brief Facts of the Case ...

Law Of Limitation Must Be Strictly Followed As Prescribed, Despite Potential Harshness: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra and Dr. Sadhna Shanker (member), held that the law of limitation, despite potentially causing harshness to a party, must be strictly applied as prescribed by the statute, and the court lacks the authority to extend the limitation period on equitable grounds. Brief Facts of the Case ...

A Buyer Can Rightfully Seek To Cancel The Agreement And Get A Refund: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra, held that a buyer would be within their rights to seek cancellation of the agreement and refund of their money in case of delay of handing over the possession by the builder. Brief Facts of the Case The case involved the sale of a residential flat, and the sale consideration for the flat was...

Condonation Of Delay Is Not A Matter Of Right: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra and Dr. Sadhna Shanker (member), held that condonation of delay cannot be claimed as a matter of right, and the applicant/petitioner must present a case showing sufficient reasons that prevented them from approaching the Court/Commission within the stipulated limitation period. Brief Facts of the Case...

Consumer Cases Monthly Digest: May 2024

Supreme Court Consumer Protection Act 1986 | Onus Of Proving That Service Was Availed For 'Commercial Purpose' Is On Service Provider : Supreme Court Case Title: SHRIRAM CHITS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED EARLIER KNOWN AS SHRIRAM CHITS (K) PVT. LTD VERSUS RAGHACHAND ASSOCIATES In an important ruling relating to consumer protection law, the Supreme Court on Friday (May 10) set out...