Consumer Law Monthly Digest: March 2026

Supreme CourtConsumer Protection Act | Keeping Bank Deposit Not 'Commercial Purpose' Merely Because Interest Is Earned : Supreme CourtCause Title: SANT ROHIDAS LEATHER INDUSTRIES AND CHARMAKAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. VERSUS VIJAYA BANKCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 267The Supreme Court on Thursday (March 19) observed that merely earning interest on bank deposits does not automatically render the transaction “commercial” so as to exclude a person from the definition of a “consumer”; rather, it must be examined whether the deposit has a close and direct nexus with a profit-generating activity.National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC)NCDRC Dismisses Consumer Complaint Filed Nearly 10 Years After Possession, Holds Claim Barred By LimitationCase Title: Pradip Sonavane & Anr. v. DSSD Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.Case No.: NC/CC/13/2026The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), comprising Justice A.P. Sahi (President) and Member Bharatkumar Pandya, dismissed a consumer complaint against a developer and housing society as barred by limitation, holding that the cause of action arose when possession was taken in 2016 and could not be treated as a continuing cause of action merely because alleged deficiencies were discovered later.National Consumer Disputes Redressal CommissionInsurance Claim Wrongly Repudiated For Film Distribution Losses Due To Telangana Agitation; NCDRC Awards ₹3.80 Crore CompensationCase Title: M/s Asian Theatres Pvt. Ltd. v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.Case Number: NC/CC/133/2013The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, comprising Justice A.P. Sahi (President) and Bharatkumar Pandya (Member), allowed the complaint filed by M/s Asian Theatres Pvt. Ltd. against Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr., holding that the repudiation of the insurance claim was arbitrary and amounted to deficiency in service.National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC)NCDRC Holds Axis Bank Liable For Refusing Demonetised Cash Deposit In KYC-Compliant Account, Orders ₹3.19 Crore CompensationCase Details: Procure Logistics Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Axis Bank Ltd.Consumer Complaint No. 2755 of 2018 (NCDRC)The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) , Bench comprising AVM J. Rajendra, Presiding Member, and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, Member , has held Axis Bank Limited guilty of deficiency in service for refusing to accept deposits of demonetised currency in a KYC-compliant current account during the demonetisation period and directed the bank to compensate the complainant company for the loss suffered.Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA)CCPA Issues Advisory Against 'LPG/Gas Charges' In Hotel Bills; Says Such Levies May Amount To Unfair Trade PracticeThe Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has issued an advisory prohibiting hotels and restaurants from adding extra charges like “LPG charges”, “gas surcharge”, or “fuel cost recovery” to customer bills, stating that such practices are unfair under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The move comes after multiple complaints that eateries were adding these charges automatically, over and above menu prices and taxes. The CCPA clarified that operational costs such as LPG, fuel, and electricity are part of running a business and must already be included in the price of food items. Charging them separately lacks transparency and misleads consumers.Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal CommissionConsumer Complaint Not Maintainable If Defective Product Disposed Before Inspection: Delhi State CommissionCase Title; Mr. Subhash Chandra Gupta vs. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd.Case No; FA-238/2024The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, comprising Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal (President) and Bimla Kumari (Member), dismissed an appeal filed against Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., holding that once the complainant had disposed of the allegedly defective refrigerator, the product was no longer available for inspection and the alleged defect could not be verified.Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal CommissionInternational SIM Not Activated Despite Payment: Delhi State Commission Enhances Compensation Against Reliance JioCase Title: RAJEEV KUMAR RAKHRA VS RELIANCE JIO INFOCOMM LTD. & ANR.Case No.: FA- 243-2024The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, comprising Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal (President) and Bimla Kumari (Member), allowed an appeal filed by complainant against Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. and Reliance Retail Ltd., holding that the complainant had suffered deficiency in service due to non-activation of an international SIM card despite payment.State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, MaharashtraMaharashtra State Commission Directs Lodha Developers To Refund ₹2.83 Crore With Interest For Possession Delay, Unfair Trade PracticeCase Title : Uttam Chatterjee & Anr. v. Shreeniwas Cotton Mills Ltd. & Ors.CC No.SC/27/CC/233/2021The State Consumer...

Consumer Law Monthly Digest: March 2026

Apoorva Pandita

Tags