Consumer Case Weekly Round-Up: September 2nd-September 9th 2023

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) NCDRC Orders Reliance Life Insurance Company To Pay Rs 1 Crore And 50k Litigation Costs Case Title: Nirmala Devi vs Reliance Life Insurance Com Recently, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) bench comprising of Subhash Chandra (Presiding Member) directed Reliance Life Insurance Company to pay the claim amount of Rs1 crore with an interest of 9% and Rs 50,000 litigation cost to the nominee of the deceased life assured (DLA). The NCDRC rejected the insurance company’s contention that the deceased policyholder had concealed material evidence in the proposal form. The NCDRC highlighted that hospitalization due to a motor vehicle accident, not reported in the proposal form, should not be considered a concealment of pre-existing illness or disease. Accidental Death By Poison In Jan Shatabdi Train, Evidence Does Not Suggest Suicide, NCDRC Orders LIC To Pay 10 Lacs Compensation And Claim Amount Case Title: Branch Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India & Anr vs Banwari Lal Gupta Recently, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (“NCDRC”) bench comprising of Dr. Inder Jit Singh (Presiding Member) has directed the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) to compensate Rs. 10 Lakhs to a nominee of the deceased. The heart of the dispute revolved around whether the death was accidental or a suicide. The NCDRC concluded that the death was accidental, taking into account medical reports, police investigations, and other evidence. It observed that there was a positive presence of aluminium phosphide and ethyl alcohol in the deceased's viscera, suggesting the possibility of poisoning by unknown persons. NCDRC Holds ICICI Bank Liable For Loss Of Original Documents, Awards 25 Lakh Compensation Case Title: Manoj Madhusudhanan vs. ICICI Bank & Anr. Recently, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) presided by Hon’ble Mr. Subhash Chandra as the presiding member, partly allowed a consumer complaint and directed the ICICI Bank (Opposite Party no. 1) to pay compensation worth Rs. 25 Lakh for losing the original property documents of a complainant. The case revolves around one Manoj Madhusudhanan (complainant), who had taken a housing loan of Rs. 1.86 Crore from ICICI Bank, to buy a property in Bangalore. To secure the loan, the he had submitted his original property documents, which eventually got lost while being sent to a storage facility by a courier company Bluedart (Opposite Party no. 2). Assam State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Dead Fly In Bottle Of Sprite, Assam State Consumer Commission Directs Coca Cola India Ltd. To Pay Compensation Of Rs. 5000/- To The Complainant Case Title: Coco Cola India Ltd. & Ors. vs. Ms. Deepali Sharma & Ors. The Assam State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided over by Justice Prasanta Kumar Deka, with Mrs. Soneka Bora and Mr. Tapas Kumar Ghosh as members, ruled in favour of a consumer who found a dead fly in a bottle of sprite and directed Coca Cola India Ltd. to pay compensation of Rs. 5000/- to the complainant. Chandigarh District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II Deficient Maintenance Of Water Purifier, Chandigarh Commission Orders Eureka Forbes Ltd. To Refund Maintenance Amount And Pay Rs. 10k Compensation Case Title: Arvind Kumar vs M/S Eureka Forbes Recently, the Chandigarh District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II bench comprising of Amrinder Singh Sidhu (President) directed the Eureka Forbes Ltd. to refund the full refund of the Annual Maintenance Contract (AMC) cost for the complainant’s Classic Eureka Forbes Water Purifier after water purifier broke down multiple times. The District Commission held that Eureka Forbes’ failure to deliver the assured services of complete repair to the water purifier, as specified in the AMC, constituted a deficiency in service. III Additional Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Recurring Brake Issues In E-Cycle As Manufacturing Defect, Bangalore Commission Holds Hero Lectro Liable Case Title: R.G. Rammohan vs Hero Lectro Recently, the III Additional Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising of Shivarama K (President) and Chandrashekhar S Noola (Member) held Hero Lectro (Division of Hero Cycles Ltd.) liable of deficiency in service for manufacturing defect in an e-cycle purchased by the complainant. The bench noted that despite raising complaints and efforts at repair by the complainant, the defect still persisted, therefore, the recurring nature of the defect indicated a manufacturing defect. Additional Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Intermediaries Responsible For Fund Transfer Issues, Bangalore Commission Orders Phonepe To Refund Amount, Pay Rs.6k Compensation And Rs....

Consumer Case Weekly Round-Up: September 2nd-September 9th 2023

Smita Singh

Tags