Choose a Category... Advertisements Airlines / Air Cargo Banking / Finance Compensation Consumer Definition Defective Goods Education Electricity Housing Insurance Interim Orders Jurisdiction Medical Negligence Others Railways

In wake of the above provisions read with Consumer Protection E-Commerce Rules 2020 ,selling goods through television fall under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act and E-Commerce Rules are applicable to such activities whether they are in the character of E-Commerce companies,,seller of products of other companies on market place or providing platform and facilitating to the manufacturer companies to sell their product through them. Looking into the activities of selling through television as said above ,details of their set up and implememtation of e-commerce Rules 2020 can be determined only when such sellers are identified and are requested to furnish relevant details to the ministry...

In this case had three issues to resolve when theft of vehicle is informed late 1. Temperary registration of the vehicle had expired 2. Delay in intimation of theft 3. Left vehicle unattended breaching condition of the insurance · On the issue of delay in information about theft ,FIR was duly filed before the police ,state machinery was brought in motion. Complainant prefereed to wait for the outcome of police verification and filed claim after police issued no trace certificate . · As per National commission observations ,expiry of temporary registration is a subject matter of motor vehicle act and insurance is to nothing to do with it. Vehicle is temporary registered and permanent registration is to take process · Vehicle was parked outside the guest house which was in a residential area and that was the only system of oarking vehicles and it could not be said to be left unattended in any manner All the things were well explained and justified ,hence there was no point to repudiate its claim ....

The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that The Amendment Act to the Code does not infringe Articles 14, 19(1)(g) read with Article 19(6), or 300-A of the Constitution of India. Further, RERA is to be read harmoniously with the Code, as amended by the Amendment Act and in case of a conflict I&B Code will prevail over RERA. Further, the remedies that are given to allottees of flats/apartments are concurrent remedies, and therefore, allottees of flats/apartments are in position to avail remedies given under the Consumer Protection Act, RERA as well as I&B Code. Further, Section 5(8)(f) as it originally appeared in the Code is a residuary provision, which always incorporated within it allottees of flats/apartments. The explanation together with the deeming fiction was added by the Amendment Act to only clarify the position of law....

Since the inception of New Consumer Protection Act 2019 and establishment of Central Consumer Protection Authority, very strong measures have been taken by the authority against the misleading ads given by business entities on various platforms, social network sites and other modes The first advisory was issued on January 20, 2021, calling industry stakeholders to cease making misleading claims that take advantage of the COVID-19 pandemic situation and are not supported by any competent and reliable scientific evidence The second advisory was issued on October 1, 2021, highlighting compliance with the provisions of Consumer Protection (e-commerce) Rules, 2020, which require every marketplace e-commerce entity to prominently display all information provided to it by the seller under Rule 6 (5), including name, designation and contact information of the grievance officer of the seller....

An interesting case was decided by the National Consumer Forum in February this year. Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) had rejected a claim requested by the kin of PR Sumanagala post his death, on the basis of his medical records and a medical attendant’s certificate. LIC rejected the claim stating that “the insured was a diabetic patient for the past 15 years and was undergoing irregular treatment.” To justify their claim, the company produced a discharge summary and the treatment records supplied by the Holy Ghost Mission Hospital where Sumanagala had died. They also produced a medical attendant’s certificate that confirmed acute renal failure as secondary cause of death and long-standing diabetes as the primary cause. On the other hand, Sumanagala’s wife continued to insist that her husband was totally healthy when he had taken the policy and that they learnt about his condition only after he was admitted to the hospital....

In civil appeal No. 3778 of 2020 in the Supreme Court before the bench of M.R. Shah; B.V. Nagarathna, J in case of Amit Katyal V/S Meera Ahuja & others, Apex court allowed withdrawal of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against a builder in an application filed by three homebuyers in view of a settlement plan agreed upon by the majority of them. In the larger interest of the homebuyers, the apex court exercised power under article 142 to permit withdrawal of the CIRP proceedings and set aside all matters pending between the parties,this order is passed on March 03, 2022 Apex Court held- Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - The object and purpose of 14 the IBC is not to kill the company and stop/stall the project, but to ensure that the business of the company runs as a going concern Dr Prem Lata ,Legal Head VOICE...

Supreme in civil appeal no 7687 of 2004 in the case of GM Telecom V M Krishanan barred the jurisdiction of consumer foras and held that such disputes will be decided by arbitrator under section 7B of Indian Telegraph Act .The award so made shall be final and not open to challenge before any court /forum The arbitrator shall be appointed by the Central Govt either specifically for determination of referred dispute or generally for the determination of disputes under this section. Apex court has further remarked that it is a well settled law that special law overrides the general law In that context, a two-Judge Bench of this Court thus held “In our opinion when there is a special remedy provided in Section 7-B of the Telegraph Act regarding disputes in respect of telephone bills, then the remedy under the Consumer Protection Act is by implication barred”...

In this case had three issues to resolve when theft of vehicle is informed late 1. Temperary registration of the vehicle had expired 2. Delay in intimation of theft 3. Left vehicle unattended breaching condition of the insurance · On the issue of delay in information about theft ,FIR was duly filed before the police ,state machinery was brought in motion. Complainant prefereed to wait for the outcome of police verification and filed claim after police issued no trace certificate . · As per National commission observations ,expiry of temporary registration is a subject matter of motor vehicle act and insurance is to nothing to do with it. Vehicle is temporary registered and permanent registration is to take process · Vehicle was parked outside the guest house which was in a residential area and that was the only system of oarking vehicles and it could not be said to be left unattended in any manner All the things were well explained and justified ,hence there was no point to repudiate its claim ....

Revision is mainly on the point of jurisdiction of the court /forum and higher court is not to look into the matter in detail about facts ,evidence etc .This remedy can be invoked even before any order passed by the lower court/forum if forum had no juridction to deal with the case and while exercising the revisional jurisdiction ,higher court may issue appropriate directions also to the lower court /forum...

As per procedure the basic complaint or petition must incorporate all relevant facts in chronological order with supportive documents and that is the base which is considered as grievance of complainant. When opposite party files written statement, nothing more can be added to the complaint because opposite party has replied to the complaint and has availed the opportunity to defend grievance against him. Anything added further will not form the part of complaint. Replication is a stage when complainant can at the best say something on written statement filed by the opposite party. It may be again emphasising the version in the complaint or reiterating the facts elaborated in the complaint or saying denial by the opposite party is wrong. Sometimes for the purpose of reiterating his stand complainant can file some document which supports the basic complaint only and not the new thing or anything beyond complaint. Document or fact given at this stage if not relevant are not considered while making order....

Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next