Consumer Cases Weekly Round-Up: 22nd to 28th April 2024

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Unreasonable Delay In Handing Over Possession Of Property To Buyers: NCDRC Directs Builder To Refund Entire Amount Along With Interest Case Title: Monika Bansal & Ors. v/s Total Environment Building Systems Pvt. Ltd. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has re-emphasized that buyers should not be subjected to indefinite delay for possession of their property. The bench presided over by Mr. Ram Surat Ram Maurya alongside Mr. Bharatkumar Pandya as member while partly allowing a consumer complaint, observed that an unreasonable delay by a builder in offering possession of flats amounted to a deficiency of service on their part. Telangana High Court No Statutory Basis To Claim Exemption From Packaging Requirements Under Packaged Commodities Rules, PepsiCo Must Comply: Telangana High Court Case Title: Pepsico India Holdings Private Ltd. vs Union of India The Telangana High Court division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti dismissed a writ petition filed by PepsiCo to claim an exemption under certain packaging requirements mandated by Rule 6(1)(a) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977. Competition Commission of India (CCI) Tie-in Agreements Between Enterprises And End-Consumer Not Covered U/s 3(4) Of Competition Act, CCI Closes Information Against Covai Centre, Ozone Developers Case Title: Buchi Ramarao Valury vs Covai Property Centre (India) Private Limited and Ors. The Competition Commission of India (CCI) bench comprising Ravneet Kaur (Chairperson), Anil Agrawal (Member), Sweta Kakkad (Member) and Deepak Anurag (Member) closed an information filed against Covai Property Centre, its subsidiary and Ozone Urbana Infra Developers for allegations concerning abuse of dominance and anti-competitive agreements under Section 4 and 3 of the Competition Act, 2002 respectively. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttarakhand Exclusion Of Coverage For Injuries Sustained During Initial Days Of Policy Issuance Is Illegal, Uttarakhand State Commission Holds Birla Sun Life Insurance Co. Liable Case Title: Sh. Manoj Kumar Pant vs General Manager/Regional Manager, Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttarakhand bench comprising Ms Kumkum Rani (President) and Mr B.S. Manral (Member) held Birla Sun Life Insurance Company liable for repudiating a valid claim based on an unreasonable policy clause excluding coverage for injuries sustained within 90 days from the issuance of the policy. It was directed to reimburse the claim amount of Rs. 6,23,896/- with interest and pay Rs. 5,000 for litigation costs to the Complainant. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karnataka Karnataka State Commission Remands Matter Back To District Commission Owing To Discrepancies, Suggests Appointment Of Assessor By District Commission For Inspection Case Title: Chandrakumar and Anr. vs Chandrakanth Kembhavi The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karnataka bench comprising Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh (President), Mr K.B. Sangannanavar (Judicial Member) and Mrs M. Divyashree (Member) remanded a matter back to the Mysuru District Commission as several discrepancies were noted in the Complainant's statement, engineer's report, and receipt of payment. The State Commission held that the issue could have been clarified if the District Commission had appointed its commissioner to inspect the construction site on the costs payable by the Complainant. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Mumbai (Maharashtra) South Mumbai District Commission Holds VLCC Liable For Negligently Conducting Laser Hair Removal Treatment Which Led To Severe Burns The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, South Mumbai (Maharashtra) bench comprising Shri. P.G. Kadu (Incharge President), Smt. S.A. Petkar (Member) and Smt. G.M. Kapse (Member) held VLCC Health Care Ltd. liable for negligently carrying out laser hair reduction treatment on the Complainant, which led to a severe burn on her entire chin. It was directed to pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation to the Complainant. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Mumbai Suburban District Commission Holds Indian Airlines Liable For Failure To Conduct Mandatory Pre-Flight Checks Resulting In Delay Of 24 Hrs Case Title: Mohit Nigam vs Air India Ltd. and Others The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai Suburban (Maharashtra) bench comprising Smt. Samindara R. Surve (President), Shri. Sanjay S. Jagdale (Member) and Shri. Sameer Kamble (Member) held Indian Airlines liable for negligence and deficiency in service for failure to conduct mandatory pre-flight checks which led to a delay of 24 hours. Indian Airlines...

Consumer Cases Weekly Round-Up: 22nd to 28th April 2024

Apoorva Pandita

Tags