IBC Moratorium Against Company Doesn't Bar Consumer Complaints Against Promoters, Directors : Supreme Court

Cause Title: TEJAS J. SHAH & AMISHA T. SHAH & ORS. VERSUS MANTRI TECHNOLOGY CONSTELLATIONS PVT.LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS BUOYANT TECHNOLOGY CONSTELLATIONS PVT.LTD.) & ORS.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 723

The Supreme Court on Monday (July 27) observed that an operation of a moratorium under the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against a residential project development company would not be a ground to reject the consumer complaints against its promoters/directors.

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Holds OTIS Liable For RAW Officer's Death Due To Lift Malfunction, Says Elevator Makers Have High Duty Of Care

Cause Title: M/S OTIS ELEVATOR CO. (INDIA) LTD. VERSUS RASHMI HANDA & ORS. (with connected case)

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 734

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (July 29) upheld the liability of OTIS Elevator Company (India) Ltd. for the death of a Research & Analysis Wing (RAW) officer who was crushed to death in a lift malfunction at the RAW headquarters in New Delhi in 2003. Dismissing OTIS's appeal against the order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, a bench comprising Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe held OTIS, being a manufacturer as well as comprehensive maintenance contractor, liable for the officer's death due to malfunction of the lift caused by fluctuation in the voltage, which remained unaddressed by the Elevator company for about eight months.

Supreme Court

States With Less Than 1000 Consumer Cases May Abolish Some District Commissions : Supreme Court

Case Title: In Re: Pay and Allowance of the Members of the U.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

(W.P.(C) No. 1144/2021)

The Supreme Court recently clarified that States where the total pendency of consumer cases is below 1,000 may abolish some District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions and entrust their work to serving judicial officers, subject to the prior concurrence of the jurisdictional High Court. The direction was issued in continuation of the Court's February 11, 2026 order, which had permitted States and Union Territories with very low consumer case pendency to devise alternative arrangements for consumer dispute redressal instead of maintaining full-fledged Consumer Commissions.

Andhra Pradesh High Court

Advocates Can't Be Sued For 'Deficiency' In Service Under Consumer Protection Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court

Case Title: A.S.S.K. Durga Prasad v. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission & Others

Case No.: Writ Petition No. 29425 of 2025

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has reiterated that complaints alleging deficiency in legal services rendered by advocates are not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 observing that the services of an advocate are rendered under a contract of personal service, which stands excluded from the definition of "service" under the Act [2026 LiveLaw (AP) 120]. A Division Bench of Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari and Justice Subhendu Samanta dismissed a writ petition challenging the concurrent orders of the District, State and National Consumer Commissions dismissing a consumer complaint against an advocate.

Kerala High Court

Employee Cannot Invoke Consumer Forum For Gratuity Claims Against Employer: Kerala High Court

Case Title: The Tirur Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v Moideen M

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 359

Case No: WP(C) 45358/ 2024

The Kerala High Court has held that an employee claiming gratuity from an employer cannot be treated as a "consumer" under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and, therefore, consumer commissions lack jurisdiction to entertain such disputes. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A delivered the judgment in a petition seeking to quash an order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Malappuram, which had directed the bank to pay the balance gratuity on a complaint by the respondent employee.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Misleading Ad Row: NCDRC Criticises District Commission For Issuing Bailable Warrants Against Salman Khan Without Hearing Him

Case title: Salman Salim Khan v/s Yogendra Singh Badiyal & Ors.

Dy No. 7520/NCDRC/2026

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission critcized the District Consumer Redressal Commission Jaipur, (DCRC) for issuing bailable warrants as well as other orders against Salman Khan, over an alleged misleading advertisement by Rajshree Pan Masala starring the actor, without making a "minimum effort" to explore distinction of a misleading ad from shadow marketing. The commission said that the district forum had passed order as if the appellant (Khan) and the company (Rajshree) had already committed a violation or a breach without a trial having proceeded.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC)

NCDRC Condones 12-Day Delay In LIC Housing Finance's Written Statement, Directs State Commission To Take Written Statement On Record

Case Title: LIC Housing Finance Ltd. v. Monica Manaktala

Case No.: Revision Petition No. NC/RP/737/2026 (along with IA No. NC/IA/7385/2026)

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), comprising Justice Saroj Yadav (Presiding Member), set aside an order of the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission rejecting LIC Housing Finance Ltd.'s application for condonation of delay in filing its written statement. Holding that the State Commission failed to consider the date of e-filing of the written statement, the Commission condoned the 12-day delay, directed the State Commission to take the written statement on record and proceed with the consumer complaint in accordance with law.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC)

NCDRC Condones 1453-Day Delay In Filing Revision Petition, Grants Benefit Of Section 14 Limitation Act

Case Title: M/s Koncept Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s BR Tourism & Anr.

Case No.: Revision Petition No. 799 of 2026

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), comprising Justice Saroj Yadav (Presiding Member), condoned a delay of 1453 days in filing a revision petition by Opposite Party M/s Koncept Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., holding that the period spent bona fide prosecuting remedies before different judicial forums was liable to be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The Commission observed that the opposite party had diligently pursued available legal remedies and that substantial justice should not be defeated on technical grounds.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC)

NCDRC Holds Builder Liable For Delayed Possession, Grants Refund Or Possession To Homebuyers

Case Title: Frontier Heights Residents Welfare Association v. Frontier Shelters Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Case No.: Consumer Complaint No. 57 of 2023

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), comprising Air Vice Marshal Jonnalagadda Rajendra (Retd.) (Presiding Member) and Dr. Sadhna Shanker (Member), partly allowed a consumer complaint filed by Frontier Heights Residents Welfare Association on behalf of 53 homebuyers. Holding Frontier Shelters Pvt. Ltd. and others liable for deficiency in service for delaying possession of flats, the Commission directed refund with interest to buyers seeking exit and completion of the project with delay compensation for those opting to take possession.

Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA)

CCPA Holds Chaayos Guilty Of Unfair Trade Practice For Levying Mandatory Service Charge, Imposes ₹50,000 Penalty

Case No.: CCPA-2/16/2025-CCPA

The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has held Chaayos (Sunshine Teahouse Pvt. Ltd.) guilty of indulging in unfair trade practices by levying service charge on customers despite clear legal guidelines prohibiting mandatory service charges in restaurants. The order was passed by a Bench comprising Chief Commissioner Nidhi Khare and Commissioner Anupam Mishra in suo motu proceedings initiated on the basis of a complaint lodged through the National Consumer Helpline (NCH). The complainant alleged that Chaayos had charged service charge in addition to GST and refused to refund it, claiming that the charge was mandated by company policy and was non-refundable.

Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Delhi State Consumer Commission Directs Cooperative Society To Refund Homebuyers For 15-Year Delay In Flat Possession

Case Title: Manjit Singh & Anr. v. Sanchar Nest Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd.

Case No.: Consumer Complaint No. CC/162/2024

The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, comprising Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal (President) and Ms. Bimla Kumari (Member), has held Sanchar Nest Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. guilty of deficiency in service for failing to hand over possession of residential flats to two homebuyers even after nearly 15 years. Observing that non-delivery of possession constitutes a "continuous wrong" giving rise to a recurring cause of action, the Commission directed the cooperative housing society to refund the amount deposited by the complainants with interest, besides awarding compensation for mental agony and litigation costs.

Jammu & Kashmir State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (JKSCDRC), Jammu

Life Insurance Policy Cannot Be Equated With Recurring Deposit; Maturity Proceeds Depend on Policy Terms and Risk Factors: J&K State Commission

Case Title: Mansa Ram v. Life Insurance Corporation of India & Ors.

Case No.: First Appeal No. 45 of 2025

The Jammu & Kashmir State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (JKSCDRC), Jammu, comprising Smt. Nighat Sultana (President (O)) and Sh. Maheep Gupta (Member), has upheld the dismissal of a consumer complaint against the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC), holding that a life insurance policy cannot be equated with a recurring deposit, as the maturity proceeds depend upon the terms of the policy and the applicable bonus, and not merely on the total premiums paid.

Jammu & Kashmir State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jammu

Mere Route Permit Breach Without Nexus To Accident Cannot Justify Repudiation Of Insurance Claim: J&K State Commission

Case Title: Kartar Motors v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Case No.: Appeal No. 3682 of 2015 (J&K State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jammu)

The Jammu & Kashmir State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jammu, comprising President (Officiating) Smt. Nighat Sultana and Member Sh. Maheep Gupta, has held that an insurance company cannot repudiate a motor insurance claim solely because the insured vehicle was operating beyond its route permit unless it establishes that the breach had a direct nexus with the accident.

Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad

Insurer Not Liable For Theft Loss If Policy Doesn't Cover Burglary: Gujarat State Consumer Commission

Case Title: Dr. Pratik J. Parmar v. Manager, Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.

Case No.: Appeal No. 99 of 2021

The Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad, comprising A.C. Raval (Presiding Member) and P.R. Shah (Member), upheld the dismissal of a consumer complaint against Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd., holding that an insurer cannot be compelled to indemnify theft or burglary losses when the insurance policy does not cover such risks. The Commission further held that written policy terms cannot be overridden by alleged oral assurances or electronic evidence that is inadmissible in law.

Jammu & Kashmir State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jammu

J&K Consumer Commission Holds J&K Bank Liable For Crediting FDR Proceeds To Third Party Without Valid Mandate

Case Title: S.C. Associates v. J&K Bank & Anr.

Case No.: C.C. No. 3145 of 2010

The Jammu & Kashmir State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jammu, comprising President (O) Smt. Nighat Sultana and Member Sh. Maheep Gupta, held Jammu & Kashmir Bank guilty of deficiency in service for unauthorisedly crediting the maturity proceeds of the complainant's Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) to a third-party account without a valid mandate.

Madhya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bhopal

Authorised Maruti Dealer Liable For Failing To Repair Accident-Damaged Vehicle Within Promised Time: MP State Consumer Commission

Case Title: Shubh Motors Private Limited v. Neeraj Gupta

Case No.: First Appeal No. 1216 of 2017

The Madhya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bhopal, comprising President Justice Smt. Sunita Yadav and Member Dr. (Mrs.) Monika Malik, has upheld the District Consumer Commission's finding that Shubh Motors Private Limited, an authorised Maruti Suzuki dealer, was guilty of deficiency in service for failing to repair and deliver a customer's accident-damaged vehicle within the promised time despite repeated assurances.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ropar (Camp Court at S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali)

Builder Liable For Handing Over Flat Without Occupation Certificate, Must Refund Excess Charges: Punjab Consumer Commission

Case Title: Col. Romesh Ghai v. Barnala Builder

Case Number: CC/403/2021

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ropar (Camp Court at S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali), comprising Kuljit Pal Singh (President) and Ranvir Kaur (Member), partly allowed a consumer complaint against Barnala Builder and Property Consultants Developers, holding that possession offered without Completion and Occupation Certificates was not legal possession, and finding the builder deficient in service for failing to provide promised amenities and illegally collecting maintenance charges. The Commission directed the builder to obtain the requisite certificates, refund the excess amounts, and pay interest and litigation costs.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gwalior

Gwalior Consumer Commission Holds Eureka Forbes Liable For Failure To Repair Defective Product During Warranty Period

Case Title : Prakriti Mishra vs Eureka Forbes Limited

Case No : D.C.C./407/C.C./396/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gwalior, comprising Rajendra Prasad Sharma (President) and Revati Raman Mishra (Member), held Eureka Forbes liable for deficiency in service for failing to repair and return a defective vacuum cleaner during the warranty period. Allowing the complaint in part, the Commission directed the company to return the repaired vacuum cleaner or, if it could not be repaired, provide a new unit of the same model or refund the purchase price, along with compensation and litigation costs.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kanchipuram District @ Chengalpattu

SBI Liable For Losing Borrower's Original Property Documents After Home Loan Repayment: Kanchipuram Consumer Commission

Case Title: Somasekhar Gangarapu & Anr. v. State Bank of India

Case No.: C.C. No. 03 of 2026

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kanchipuram District @ Chengalpattu, comprising President Thiru. U. Kasipandian and Member-I Thiru. M. Jawahar, has held the State Bank of India (SBI) liable for deficiency in service for losing the complainants' original property title documents after repayment of a home loan. The Commission observed that the bank failed to comply with the Reserve Bank of India's directions governing the release of original property documents and failed to adequately assist the complainants in obtaining certified copies after the documents were misplaced.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South-II, Delhi

Delhi Consumer Commission Holds Tata AIG Liable For Wrongfully Repudiating Insurance Claim

Case Title: MOIDADIN vs TATA AIG INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

Case No: CC NO. DC/AB1/670/CC/117/2024

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South-II, Delhi, comprising Monika Aggarwal Srivastava (President), Dr. Rajender Dhar (Member), and Ritu Garodia (Member), held Tata AIG Insurance Company Ltd. liable for wrongfully repudiating the complainant's insurance claim. The Commission allowed the complaint and held that the insurer's failure to adopt a fair, transparent, and consumer-friendly approach while examining the claim amounted to an unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lakhimpur Kheri

SBI Liable For Disclosing Customer's Savings Account Details To Employer Without Consent: Lakhimpur Kheri Consumer Commission

Case Title: Pankaj Kumar Shukla v. Chief Branch Manager, State Bank of India & Ors.

Case No.: CC/127/ 2022

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lakhimpur Kheri, comprising President Abhimanyu Lal Srivastava and Members Dr. Alok Kumar Sharma and Smt. Joohi Quddusi, has held the State Bank of India (SBI) liable for deficiency in service for disclosing a customer's personal bank account details to his employer without his consent. The Commission observed that a bank cannot share a customer's personal banking information with a third party without the customer's consent and held that such unauthorized disclosure amounted to a violation of banking norms and deficiency in service.

Mumbai Consumer Forum Admits Case Against PVR Over Technical Glitches, Delayed Screening Of 'Dhurandhar: The Revenge' Film

A District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC) has admitted a complaint against multiplex company PVR Cinemas for alleged 'deficiency' in screening of Bollywood film 'Dhurandhar: The Revenge' and has issued notice to it. The DCDRC coram comprising Samindara Surve (President) and Sameer Kamble (Member) in its July 2 order, admitted the complaint filed by one Snigdha Khandelwal, who has accused PVR of providing 'deficient' services as the screening of the film was interrupted on several counts because of some technical issue at their end.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Coimbatore

Air Arabia Liable For Wrongfully Denying Boarding To Passenger Over 'Non-Machine Readable' Passport: Coimbatore Consumer Commission

Case Title: Manikandan Nagaraj vs. Air Arabia PJSC

Case Number: C.C.No.388/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Coimbatore, comprising President Thiru. R. Thangavel and Member Thiru. P. Marimuthu, has held Air Arabia liable for deficiency in service for arbitrarily denying boarding to a passenger on the ground that his passport was allegedly "not machine readable." The Commission observed that the airline failed to establish any valid basis for refusing boarding, particularly when the complainant travelled to the UAE on the very same day using the same passport through another airline and was cleared by the immigration authorities.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thrissur

Kerala Water Authority Liable For Issuing Arbitrary Water Bills Despite Unchanged Meter Readings: Thrissur Consumer Commission

Case Title: Kerala State Service Pensioners Union v. Assistant Engineer, P.H. Section, Kerala Water Authority & Others

Case No.: CC/27/22

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thrissur, comprising President Sri C.T. Sabu and Members Sreeja S and Ram Mohan R , has held the Kerala Water Authority (KWA) liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for issuing arbitrary water bills despite recording the same meter reading over consecutive billing cycles. The Commission observed that raising water consumption charges despite identical meter readings was arbitrary and deprived the consumer of the right to be informed of the basis on which the charges were raised.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh

Hotel Liable For Guest's Injury Caused By Unsafe Premises, Hospitality Providers Must Ensure Guests' Safety: Chandigarh Consumer Commission

Case Title: PRIYANKA SUD vs THE MANOR LUXURY SERVICE APARTMENTS

Case No: CC NO. DC/AB1/44/CC/241/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, comprising Amrinder Singh Sidhu (President) and Brij Mohan Sharma (Member), held Manor Luxury Service Apartments liable for deficiency in service after the complainant slipped and sustained a foot injury due to unsafe conditions on the premises. The Commission partially allowed the complaint and observed that a hospitality service provider is legally obligated to ensure the safety and well-being of its guests.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thrissur

Thrissur Consumer Commission Holds Mother Hospital Liable For Colonoscopy Without Patient's Informed Consent

Case Title: CC/210/12

Case Title: Sarojini v. Director, Mother Hospital, Thrissur & Ors.

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thrissur, comprising President Sri C.T. Sabu and Members Sreeja S. and Ram Mohan R., has held the Director of Mother Hospital, Thrissur, its Medical Superintendent and the doctor who advised and performed a colonoscopy liable for medical negligence and deficiency in service for conducting the elective procedure without obtaining the patient's informed consent.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kangra at Dharamshala

Reliance Retail Liable For Selling Expired Instant Noodles; Retailers Cannot Shift Burden To Consumers To Check Expiry Date: Kangra Consumer Commission

Case Title: Jugal Kishore v. Reliance Retail Limited

Case No.: DC/18/CC/59/2026

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kangra at Dharamshala, comprising President Mr. Hemanshu Mishra and Members Ms. Arti Sood and Sh. Narayan Thakur, has held Reliance Retail Limited liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for selling an expired packet of instant noodles to a consumer. The Commission observed that a retailer has a statutory and non-delegable duty to ensure that no expired food product is displayed or sold to consumers, and that the sale of such products endangers public health and violates consumers' right to safety.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kurnool

Vishal Mega Mart Liable For Selling Expired Maggi Noodles; Kurnool Consumer Commission

Case Title: P. Sravan Kumar v. The Manager, Vishal Mega Mart (Airplaza Retail Holding Private Limited)

Case No.: Consumer Complaint No. 60/2026

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kurnool, comprising President Karanam Kishore Kumar and Member S. Nazima Kausar, has held Vishal Mega Mart liable for selling an expired packet of Maggi Atta Instant Noodles. The Commission observed that the sale of expired food products constitutes a grave violation of consumer rights and poses a significant threat to public health and safety.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Delhi

Delhi Consumer Commission Holds Forbcorp Liable For Deficient Holiday Services

Case Title: DHRUV KASHYAP vs FORBCORP PRIVATE LIMITED

Case No: CC NO. DC/83/CC/68/2024

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Delhi Comprising Monika A. Srivastava (President) and Kiran Kaushal (Member), has held Forbcorp Private Limited liable for deficiency of service for failing to provide the promised holiday services. The Commission allowed the complaint and held that an agreement denying a refund under any circumstances is unconscionable and amounts to an unfair trade practice.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kangra at Dharamshala

Hostel Directed To Refund Rs.30,000 To Student Over Poor Food, Lack Of Wi-Fi And Maintenance: Kangra Consumer Commission

Case Title: Aryan Rawat vs Nalanda Living Hostel

Case Number: DC/18/CC/370/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kangra at Dharamshala, comprising President Mr. Hemanshu Mishra and Members Ms. Arti Sood and Sh. Narayan Thakur, held Nalanda Living Hostel liable for deficiency in service. The Commission observed that accepting upfront commercial charges while failing to provide basic, habitable amenities such as palatable food and internet connectivity constituted a classic case of deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Palakkad

Federal Bank Liable For Illegally Retaining Borrower's Original Title Deeds After Loan Closure: Palakkad Consumer Commission

Case Title: Shabina M.A. v. The Manager, Federal Bank, Pudunagaram Branch & Anr.

Case No.: DC/563/CC/425/2024

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Palakkad, comprising President Sri Vinay Menon V. and Members Smt. Vidya A. and Sri Krishnankutty N.K., has held Federal Bank liable for deficiency in service for arbitrarily retaining a borrower's original title deeds for more than a year after closure of the secured loan. The Commission observed that the bank failed to justify the prolonged retention of the documents despite admitting that no property had been charged as security for the PMEGP loan, and held that such illegal withholding of title deeds amounted to deficiency in service.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh

Failure To Refund Cancelled Booking Amount: Chandigarh Consumer Commission Holds Airbnb Liable

Case Title: Tanya Walia vs Airbnb & Ors.

Case Number: DC/AB1/44/CC/70/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh, comprising President Mr. Amrinder Singh Sidhu and Member Mr. B.M. Sharma, has partly allowed a consumer complaint against Airbnb India Pvt. Ltd. for failing to refund a booking amount despite acknowledging the complainant's entitlement to the refund. The Commission held that Airbnb's failure to process the refund within a reasonable time, despite repeated assurances, amounted to deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.

Chandigarh District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Chandigarh Consumer Commission Holds Diet Clinic Liable For Failure To Provide Promised Personalized Diet Services

Case Title: Meghna Nehra vs. SG Diet Clinic Pvt. Ltd & Ors.

Case Number: DC44/CC961/2025

The Chandigarh District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Pawanjit Singh along with Mr. B.M. Sharma as a member, has directed a Diet Clinic based in Chandigarh to refund Rs.28,000/- to a woman on account of failure to provide personalized diet plans as promised to her. The Commission held that despite receiving payment for personalized diet services, the Diet Clinic failed to provide services as promised and therefore guilty of deficiency in service.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh

Passenger Forced To Purchase Last-Minute Tickets After Flight Disruption: Chandigarh Consumer Commission Holds IndiGo, Turkish Airlines Liable

Case Title: Mohit Bansal vs. Indigo Airlines & Ors.

Case Number: DC/44/CC/1058/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh, comprising President Pawanjit Singh and Member B.M. Sharma, has partly allowed a consumer complaint against IndiGo Airlines and Turkish Airlines. The Commission held the airlines liable for deficiency in service after a sudden flight disruption forced the complainant to purchase expensive last-minute tickets to ensure his son reached a mandatory university orientation programme in the United States.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Bastar Kanker

Bus Operator Liable For Loss Of Passenger's Suitcase Due To Staff Negligence: Bastar Consumer Commission

Case Title: Utkarsh Rathore v. Mahindra Travels & Anr.

Case No.: C.C. No. 44/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Bastar Kanker, comprising President Smt. Sujata Jaswal and Member Shri Dakeshwar Soni, has held Mahindra Travels and its Manager liable for deficiency in service for losing a passenger's suitcase during a bus journey. The Commission observed that once a transport operator takes custody of a passenger's luggage, it owes a duty of reasonable care to ensure its safe delivery, and cannot escape liability for the loss caused by the negligence of its staff.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur

Consumer Court Directs Maruti Suzuki To Replace Car With E-20 Compliant Model

Case Title: Dr. Premraj Devta vs Nexa Magneto & Ors.

DC/387/CC/91/2025

Amidst concerns raised by various vehicle owners over the use of E-20 petrol, a Consumer Commission in Chhattisgarh has passed a notable order, directing Maruti Suzuki to replace a non-E20-compliant vehicle. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur, has directed Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. and its authorised dealer, Nexa Magnato, to replace a Grand Vitara Strong Hybrid manufactured in January 2023 but sold to a consumer in June 2024 with a new E20-compatible vehicle, holding that the failure to inform the buyer about the vehicle's incompatibility with E20 fuel and the failure to provide a lasting solution amounted to deficiency in service.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh

Immigration Consultant Liable For Misrepresenting Canadian College Admission, Chandigarh Consumer Commission Orders ₹12.35 Lakh Refund

Case Title: Aastha Saini vs BB Council

Case Number: DC/AB1/44/CC/223/2023

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh, comprising President Mr. Amrinder Singh Sidhu and Member Mr. B.M. Sharma, has held Ravinder Singh, proprietor of BB Council, an immigration consultancy, and Pushpinder Kaur liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for misrepresenting that a student's admission to a Canadian college had been secured and supplying admission-related documents that were found to be non-genuine.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram

Confirmed Booking, No Check-In: Consumer Commission Holds OYO Liable For Deficiency In Service

Case Title: T.S. Ashish v. OYO Hotels and Homes Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

CC No.: 639/2023

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram, comprising President Sri P.V. Jayarajan and Members Smt. Preetha G. Nair and Sri Viju V.R., has held OYO Hotels and Homes Pvt. Ltd. and its partner hotel jointly liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for denying a consumer check-in despite a confirmed and fully paid booking. The Commission observed that compelling a consumer to pay additional charges after confirming the booking, delaying check-in for nearly an hour, and failing to issue a valid invoice amounted to deficiency in service and violated the Consumer Protection (General) Rules, 2020.

Chandigarh Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Chandigarh Consumer Commission Order Asics India To Refund Price Of Defective Shoes, Pay Rs.10,000 Compensation

Case Title: Ajay Malik vs. Asics India Pvt. Ltd.

Case Number: DC/AB1/44/CC/37/2021

The Chandigarh Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held Asics India Pvt. Ltd. liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for failing to replace or refund the amount for a defective pair of running shoes, despite approving the consumer's claim for exchange. The bench presided by Mr. Amrinder Singh Sidhu along with Mr. Brij Mohan Sharma as member directed the shoe company to refund the purchase amount along with compensation of Rs.10,000/-.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Malappuram

Medical Negligence In Infant Circumcision: Malappuram Consumer Commission Awards ₹50 Lakh Compensation

Case Title: Nasan Bin Noushad @ Nishan Bin Noushad Vs. Dr. Ashique & Ors

Case No.: CC/01/2020

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Malappuram, comprising President Sri V. Ravindran and Members Smt. R. Bindu and Sri K. Muhammed Ismail, held a doctor and a private hospital liable for medical negligence and deficiency in service. Observing that the opposite parties failed to explain the infant's severe injuries and that the hospital lacked adequate hygiene and sterilisation standards, the Commission directed them to jointly and severally pay ₹50 lakh as compensation to the complainant.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Delhi

Delhi Consumer Commission Holds Bata Liable For Not Displaying Prior Notice On Carry Bag Charges

Case Title: Priti Agarwal v. Bata India Private Limited

Consumer Complaint No.: DC/83/CC/151/2023

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Delhi, comprising President Ms. Monika A. Srivastava and Member Ms. Kiran Kaushal, held Bata India Pvt. Ltd. liable for deficiency in service for failing to properly inform customers, before purchase, through prominent notices displayed at the store, that paper carry bags were chargeable and optional.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kangra at Dharamshala

EPFO Liable For Deficiency In Service For Arbitrarily Rounding Down Employee's Service Period: Kangra Consumer Commission

Case Title: Abhinay Katoch vs. EPFO

Case Number: DC/18/CC/297/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kangra at Dharamshala (Himachal Pradesh), comprising President Hemanshu Mishra and Members Arti Sood and Narayan Thakur, held the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) liable for deficiency in service. It found that the EPFO had arbitrarily rounded down the complainant's service period without evidence while calculating his pension withdrawal benefit, resulting in a short payment.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Solan, Himachal Pradesh

Solan Consumer Commission Directs Himalayan Dreams Villas To Refund ₹32 Lakh To Homebuyers For Failing To Deliver Promised Cottage

Case Title: Ravneet Singh & Anr. v. Himalayan Dreams Villas Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Case Number: DC/25/CC/143/2024

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, has held Himalayan Dreams Villas Pvt. Ltd. and its authorised signatory Vicar Walia liable for deficiency in service for failing to construct and hand over a promised cottage to homebuyers despite receiving ₹32 lakh towards the project. The Commission directed the developer to refund the amount with interest, observing that the complainants' unrebutted evidence established the payments and the developer's failure to fulfil its contractual obligations.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Baramulla/Bandipora

Bank Cannot Deny Insurance Benefits By Reversing Premium After Borrower's Death: Kupwara Consumer Commission

Case Title: Shahzada Begum & Ors. v. Chairman, Jammu & Kashmir Bank & Ors.

Case No: 110/2024.

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Baramulla/Bandipora, comprising President Peerzada Qousar Hussain and Member Ms. Nyla Yaseen, has held Jammu & Kashmir Bank and PNB MetLife India Insurance Co. Ltd. liable for denying loan-linked insurance benefits after reversing the insurance premium following the borrower's death. The Commission observed that once a premium is deducted from a borrower's account for obtaining insurance coverage, the resulting rights cannot be defeated merely by reversing the premium after the borrower's death, and consumers cannot be made to suffer due to internal lapses between the bank and the insurer.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kurnool

Kurnool Consumer Commission Directs ICICI Lombard To Pay ₹50 Lakh Accident Insurance Claim; Holds Insurer Cannot Introduce New Conditions At Claim Stage

Case Title: Gandla Prameela v. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr.

Case No.: Consumer Complaint No. 174/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kurnool, comprising President Sri Karanam Kishore Kumar and members Sri N. Narayana Reddy and Smt. S. Nazima Kausar, has held that insurance companies cannot reject claims on hyper-technical grounds when the occurrence of an insured event is established by cogent evidence. The Commission partly allowed a complaint filed by the nominee of the deceased policyholder against ICICI Lombard General Insurance, observing that the insurer's insistence on Income Tax Returns and bank statements at the claim stage, when such details were not required during the proposal stage, amounts to an impermissible introduction of new conditions post-contract.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pathankot

Theft In Reserved AC Coach: Pathankot Consumer Commission Holds Northern Railway Liable

Case Title: Kalu Ram v. General Manager, Northern Railway & Ors.

Case Number: DC/662/RBT/CC/126 of 2023

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pathankot, comprising President Kulwinder Singh Pannu and Member Raj Kumar Shukla, held Northern Railway liable for deficiency in service following the theft of a passenger's handbag from a reserved AC coach. The Commission observed that although Railways are generally not liable for the loss of unbooked luggage, liability would arise where the loss is attributable to the negligence of railway staff. It found that the Railway failed to establish that a coach attendant was present and on duty at the relevant time.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ferozepur

Consumer Commissions Cannot Decide Disputes Relating To Electricity Theft Allegations: Punjab Consumer Commission

Case Title: Mahinder Singh vs. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited & Anr.

C.C. No.101 of 2026

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ferozepur, comprising President Kiranjit Kaur Arora and Member Suman Khanna dismissed a consumer complaint seeking installation of an agricultural electricity connection, holding that Consumer Commissions lack jurisdiction to entertain disputes relating to unauthorized use of electricity under Section 126 and offences of electricity theft under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam

Ernakulam Consumer Commission Holds Qatar Airways Liable For Denying Boarding On Return Journey

Case Title: Roshan Jose & Ors v. Qatar Airways

Case Number: C.C. No.143/2019

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam, comprising President D.B. Binu and Members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia T.N., held Qatar Airways guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for allowing a family to travel from Italy to India after verifying their travel documents, but subsequently refusing to permit their minor children to complete the return journey on the very same documents.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District), Delh

Delhi Consumer Commission Declares Its Own Refund Order 'Non-Est' After NCLT-Approved Plan-A Is Implemented

Case Title: Rohit Lal & Anr. v. Cosmos Infra Engineering (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Case No.: Review Application No. DC/80/RA/15/2024 and Execution Application No. DC/80/EA/4/2025 in Consumer Complaint No. DC/80/CC/139/2021

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District), Delhi, comprising President Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar and Members Ashwani Kumar Mehta and Harpreet Kaur Charya, held that its earlier refund order in favour of the homebuyers had become non-est and incapable of execution in view of the subsequent approval and implementation of the NCLT-approved Plan-A. The Commission held that its earlier order could not be executed as it was contrary to the binding directions issued by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT).

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Shimla

Internet Disruptions Despite Repeated Complaints: Shimla Consumer Commission Holds Jio Fiber Guilty Of Deficiency In Service

Case Title: Smt. Pratima Chauhan V. Reliance Jio Fiber

Case No.: Complaint No.: 124/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Shimla, comprising President Dr. Baldev Singh and Member Ms. Nidhi Sharma, held that Reliance Jio Fiber was guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for failing to restore the complainant's internet connection despite repeated complaints and for failing to produce evidence that the grievance had been resolved.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kannur

Parle Biscuit Company, Retailer Liable For Selling Underweight Biscuit Packet: Kannur Consumer Commission

Case Title: Asique T.P. v. Parle Biscuit Company & Anr.

Case No.: CC No. 504/2024

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kannur, comprising President Ravi Susha and Members Molykutty Mathew and Sajeesh K.P., has held Parle Biscuit Company and a retailer liable for selling an underweight biscuit packet, holding that selling an underweight product amounts to an unfair trade practice. The Commission also observed that a retailer cannot escape liability merely because the defect originated with the manufacturer.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam

Insurer Can't Restrict Stem Cell Therapy Claim Using 'Modern Treatment' Clause: Ernakulam Consumer Commission

Case Title: Ravivarma V. v. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr.

Case No.: CC No. 542 of 2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam, comprising President D.B. Binu and Members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia T.N., has held that National Insurance Company Ltd. cannot arbitrarily restrict reimbursement for recognised life-saving procedures such as stem cell transplantation by mechanically invoking "Modern Treatment" sub-limits.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Baramulla/Bandipora

National Insurance Co. Can't Deny Fire Insurance Claim While Relying On Surveyor's Report: Baramulla Consumer Commission

Case Title: Manzoor Ahmad Dar v. J&K Grameen Bank & Anr.

Case No.: CC No. 08/2018

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Baramulla/Bandipora, comprising President Peerzada Qousar Hussain and Member Ms. Nyla Yaseen, directed National Insurance Company Ltd. to compensate a shopkeeper for losses suffered in a fire incident after holding that the insurer could not deny receipt of the claim while simultaneously relying on a surveyor's report prepared pursuant to the same claim. The Commission observed that a surveyor's assessment must be supported by cogent reasons, particularly where the police and Fire & Emergency Services reports substantiate more extensive damage to the insured property.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ranga Reddy

HP Liable For Concealing Laptop Display Panel Specifications: Ranga Reddy Consumer Commission

Case Title: Jerin George v. HP India Sales Private Limited

Case Number: CC No. 477/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ranga Reddy, comprising President Smt. Chinthineni Latha Kumari and Members Smt. Madhavi Sasanakota and Smt. K. Kathiyayani Khanday, held HP India Sales Private Limited guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for concealing the laptop's display panel specifications, using misleading advertisements, and wrongfully denying the consumer's refund request.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurgaon

Health Insurance Policy Cancellation: Gurugram Consumer Commission Holds Niva Bupa, Yashoda Hospital Liable

Case Title: Neeraj Kumar Singhal v. Yashoda Superspeciality Hospital & Cancer Institute & Ors.

Case No.: DC/62/CC/523/2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurgaon, comprising President Shri Sanjeev Jindal and Members Ms. Jyoti Siwach and Ms. Khushwinder Kaur, held Yashoda Superspeciality Hospital and Niva Bupa Health Insurance Company Limited guilty of deficiency in service in a case where the complainant alleged arbitrary cancellation of his health insurance policy and irregular hospital billing during his treatment for colon cancer.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hamirpur

Hamirpur Consumer Commission Directs EaseMyTrip To Compensate Groom After Failing To Inform Him Of Flight Cancellation

Case Title: Nitin Thakur v. Easy Trip Planner Ltd. & Anr

Case No.: DC/17/CC/118/2024

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hamirpur, comprising President Hemanshu Mishra and Members Sneh Lata and Joginder Mahajan, held EaseMyTrip (Easy Trip Planner Ltd.) liable for deficiency in service for issuing an air ticket after Go First Airlines had already suspended its operations and for failing to inform the passenger in advance that the flight had been cancelled.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram

Thiruvananthapuram Consumer Commission Holds Railways Liable For Failing To Inform Passenger Of Revised Departure Time

Case Title: Prasanthakumar P. v. Southern Railway

Case No: DC/565/CC/471/2019

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram, comprising President P.V. Jayarajan and Members Preetha G. Nair and Viju V.R., held Southern Railway liable for deficiency in service for failing to inform passengers about the rescheduled departure time of a train.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Coimbatore

Negligence During Surgery, Cotton Gauze Left Inside Woman's Body; Coimbatore Consumer Commission Awards ₹12 Lakh Compensation

Case Title: G. Bhuvaneswari v. Dr. Chandrakala Makutapathy & Ors.

Case No.: Consumer Complaint No. 01/2022

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Coimbatore, comprising President R. Thangavel and Member P. Marimuthu, has held a gynaecologist and Genesis Royal Infirmary Pvt. Ltd. jointly liable for medical negligence after finding that a gauze-like foreign material had remained at the site of a hysterectomy, resulting in serious post-operative complications, including pelvic abscess, colovaginal fistula and multiple corrective surgeries.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kollam

Boutique Liable For Non-Delivery Of Dress Despite Full Payment: Kollam Consumer Commission

Case Title: Devi Priya R. v. Alankritha Boutique

Case No.: C.C. No. 439/ 2025

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kollam, comprising President S.K. Sreela and Member Stanly Harold, held Alankritha Boutique liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for failing to deliver one of the dresses ordered by the complainant despite receiving the full payment and for failing to refund the amount.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur

Dry Cleaner Liable For Burning Customer's Sherwani During Ironing: Raipur Consumer Commission

Case Title: Dageshwar Yadav Vs. Ashok Nirmalker

Case No.: CC/2019/514

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur, comprising President Dakeshwar Prasad Sharma and Members Nirupama Pradhan and Anil Kumar Agnihotri, held the dry-cleaning service provider liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for negligently damaging the complainant's sherwani during ironing.

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-VIII (Central), Delhi

Delhi Consumer Commission Dismisses Super Cassettes' Ferrari Insurance Claim; Cites Unrecognised Motorsport Event And Lack Of FMSCI Racing Licence

Case Title-M/s Super Cassettes Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr.

Case No. -Consumer Complaint No. DC/77/CC/70/2026

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-VIII (Central), Delhi, comprising President Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar and Member Dr. Rashmi Bansal, dismissed a consumer complaint against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd., holding that the insurer was justified in repudiating an insurance claim arising from a Ferrari's accident during a high-speed track event.