Consumer Cases Weekly Round Up: 12th To 18th February 2024

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC Holds Vatika Limited Liable For Delay In Construction Of Residential Project Case Title: Madhu Gupta & Anr. Vs. Vatika Ltd. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Ram Surat Ram Maurya (member) and Bharatkumar Pandya(member), held Vatika Limited liable for deficiency in service over delay in the construction of the residential space on the plot booked by the complainant. Central Information Commission, New Delhi Can't Order Furnishing Of Denied Information U/s Sec. 18, RTI Act, Inquiry is Limited To 'Intentional' Denial: CIC The Central Information Commission, New Delhi bench comprising Shri Heeralal Samariya (Chief Information Commissioner) dismissed a complaint filed by an aggrieved consumer whose requested information was not appropriately furnished by the Department of Consumer Affairs, allegedly. The Central Information Commission noted that the scope of a complaint under Section 18 was limited to the question of whether the denial of information was 'intentional' and did not extend to ordering the public authority to furnish information. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Shimla (Himachal Pradesh) H.P. State Commission Holds Oriental Insurance Co. Liable For Repudiating Insurance Claim Solely Due To Delayed Intimation, Orders To Pay Rs. 7.9 Lakhs Case Title: Gita Ram Negi vs The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd and others The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Shimla (Himachal Pradesh) bench comprising Justice Inder Singh Mehta (President) held Oriental Insurance Company Limited liable for deficiency in service for rejecting a claim solely only based on delayed intimation of the damage to the insurance company. The bench set aside the decision of the Shimla District Commission and directed the insurance company to the insurance claim of Rs. 7,90,000 along with Rs. 50,000 for the litigation costs to the Complainant. Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Holds Sir Ganga Ram Hospital And Doctors Liable For Medical Negligence In Patient's Death The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission headed by Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal (President), Pinki (Member) and J.P. Agrawal (Member) has found Sir Ganga Ram Hospital and its medical practitioners guilty of medical negligence in the treatment of a patient, ultimately leading to her demise. The commission ordered hospital and doctors to pay Rs. 5,10,000 as compensation. This amount includes Rs. 1,97,900, representing the charges for the surgical procedure performed. And 15000 for litigation charges. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal (Siliguri Circuit Bench) 'Consumer Protection Act Prevails Even When Alternate Remedies Are Available', West Bengal State Commission Remands Electricity Matter Back The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal (Siliguri Circuit Bench) comprising Mr Kundan Kumar Kumai (President) and Mr Swapan Kumar Das (Member) remanded a matter back to the District Commission related to a discrepancy in billing amount issued by the West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. The State Commission held that the District Commission erroneously dismissed the complaint on the basis that it was not empowered to adjudicate on the issue. Rather, consumers can adjudicate on all types of complaints and the Consumer Protection Act complements other remedies and is not in derogation of other laws. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Madhya Pradesh No Proof Of Theft Of Gold Chain From Compartment, M.P. State Commission Allows Western Central Railways' Appeal The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Madhya Pradesh bench comprising Shri A.K. Tiwari (President) and Dr. Shrikant Pandey (Member) allowed an appeal filed by Western Central Railway against the order of the District Commission, Katni, Madhya Pradesh. The matter pertained to an alleged snatching of the Complainant's gold chain from outside of the train window while sleeping in the middle birth of a reserved compartment. The State Commission observed that it was untenable to hold that such theft could happen from the middle birth as it is not exposed to the train window. The Complainant also failed to substantiate the claimed value of the gold chain with sufficient proof and the claim regarding the absence of security. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab Charging More Than MRP For Water Bottles Prohibited Under Legal Metrology Rules And CPA, Punjab State Commission Holds Drinkery 51 Bar Liable The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab bench comprising Justice Raj Shekhar Attri (President) and Mr Rajesh K. Arya (Member) held Drinkery 51, Chandigarh liable for unfair trade practice for charging more than the ...

Consumer Cases Weekly Round Up: 12th To 18th February 2024

Apoorva Pandita

Tags