Consumer Cases Weekly Round-Up: 8th To 14th July 2024

Supreme Court 'People Don't Purchase High-End Luxurious Cars To Suffer Discomfort' : Supreme Court Holds Mercedes Benz Liable For Faults In Vehicles The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld orders of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) granting relief to two companies who had purchased cars from luxury car company Mercedes-Benz for the use of their directors. A bench of Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal was dealing with appeals arising out of a case of a car developing heating issues and another case of an accident wherein the airbags of the car did not deploy. Case Title – M/S Daimler Chrysler India Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Controls & Switchgear Company Ltd. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 447 National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Ambiguous Insurance Terms Should Be Interpreted In Favour of Insured: NCDRC Holds Bajaj Allianz Insurance Liable For Deficiency In Service The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by AVM J. Rajendra, held that vague terms in an insurance contract should be interpreted in favour of the insured party in the event of a dispute. Case Title: Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. P. Santha Kumari Case Number: F.A. No. 204/2022 National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC Holds Oriental Insurance Liable For Deficiency In Service While Holding That Filing Two Claims For Same Occurrence Is Unsustainable The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Dr. Sadhna Shanker, held that two separate claim forms cannot be filed by the insured for the same occurrence as they do not change the nature of the occurrence and loss. Case Title: Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. M/S. S. P. Singla Construction Pvt. Ltd Case Number: F.A.No. 943/2016 National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Non-Standard Basis Of Insurance Claim Is Fair If Breach Has Occured From Both Parties: NCDRC The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by AVM J. Rajendra, held that the justification of an insurance claim on a non-standard basis is deemed fair when breaches have occurred from both parties. Case Title: Kuljit Kaur Vs. Cholamandlam Ms. General Insurance Co. Ltd Case Number: R.P. No. 925/2019 State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bihar Consumer Forums Do Not Have Jurisdiction To Entertain Complaints Of Pending Electricity Bills Under Electricity Act, 2003: Bihar State Commission The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bihar bench of Miss Gita Verma (Judicial Member) and Md. Shamim Akhtar (Judicial Member) held that consumer forums cannot entertain complaints filed by a consumer or any person against the assessment made under Section 126 or action taken under Sections 135-140 of the Electricity Act, 2003 Case Title: Vijay Kumar vs Executive Engineer, Electricity and Anr. Case No.: Appeal No. 218 of 2018 State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh Uttar Pradesh State Commission Holds LIC Liable For Wrongful Repudiation Of Valid Claim The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh bench of Mr Sushil Kumar (Presiding Member) and Mrs Sudha Upadhyay (Member) held 'Life Insurance Corporation of India' (LIC) liable for wrongfully repudiating a genuine insurance claim based on the policyholder's failure to avail the accidental coverage after attaining majority by paying an additional amount. It was held that the policyholder passed away before the next due date of the premium instalment and therefore, the repudiation was unjustified. Case Title: L.I.C. vs Smt. Shanti Singh Case No.: First Appeal No. A/2005/177 Delhi State Commission Consumer Complaints Must Be Lodged Within Two Years From Date Of Cause Of Action: Delhi State Commission The Delhi State Commission, presided by Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal and Ms. Pinki, dismissed a complaint against Oriental Insurance Ltd., citing the presence of a limitation clause. It was further held that consumer complaints are time-barred and need to be filed within two years from the date of the action unless sufficient reasons are present. Case Title: M/S Dialmaz Vs. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd Case Number: C.C. No. 295/2016 Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Bangalore (Karnataka) Bangalore District Commission Holds Aditya Birla Finance Liable For Failure To Close Loan Account, Charge Late Fee The Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Bangalore (Karnataka) bench of Sri B. Narayanappa (President), Smt. Jyothi N (Member) and Smt. Sharavathi S.M (Member) held 'Aditya Birla Finance' liable for deficiency in service for charging a late fee for a loan payment despite receiving the full amount and for its failure to close the loan account and provide resolution to the Complainant's grievances. ...

Consumer Cases Weekly Round-Up: 8th To 14th July 2024

Apoorva Pandita

Tags