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

law laid down by Supreme Court for “Class Action” character as a consumer Complaint thus stands as hereunder- 1. There should be an element of sameness of the interest and with common interest of all the consumers joining together. 2. The complaint should be represented by one leading case for protection of interest& benefit of all the consumers. 3. Factually different cost,size ,booking date and price variation will not affect the character of “class action” against the same party with the same objective held Supreme Court. 4. The content of the complaint must also not be a single party centric it should speak for all the consumers....

Justice V K Jain also referred to a Consumer Complaint No. 223 of 2006, Shri Matber Singh v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., IV (2014) CPJ 126 (NC) decided on 5.9.2014 and noted that an accident may include events like snake bite, frost bite and dog bite. Hence, it was held that malaria due to mosquito bite is not a disease and very well could be termed as an accident Claim of the complainant was directed to be paid in the above terms and observations...

It’s a common grievance of home buyers that builder fails to complete the construction work including amenities as per plan and agreed terms. With the result occupancy certificate is not issued by the concerned authorities. In some cases home buyers take possession under compelling circumstances with incomplete work and occupancy certificate still remains a problem. Here is a unique case decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 11th January 2022 which gives a new dimension to the issue of fixing liability of Developer when occupancy certificate not provided to the home buyers....

Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority has issued a circular dt 20.9.2011 vide their reference no –IRDA/HLTH/MISC/CIR/216/09/2011 wherein certain guidelines have been issued for condoning the delay in claim intimation /documents submission with respect to all life insurance contracts and all non-life individual and group insurance contracts while settling the claims of the insurers.It is particularly pin-pointed that- “the current contractual obligation of the insured to intimate the company or submit the papers within specific time is for the purpose of investigation,loss assessment etc but this condition should not prevent genuine claims when delay is due to unavoidable circumstances”.It further states that- “insurers decision to reject the claim shall be based on sound logic and valid grounds,be noted such limitation clause does not work in isolation and is not absolute.” At the end INSURERS are advised “to incorporate additional wordings in the policy documents ,suitably enunciating insurer’sstand to condone delay on merits for delayed claims when delay is proved to be for reasons beyond the control.”...

Yet another dimension in medical negligence cases. Hon’rable National Commission gives no relief to erring doctor who was found negligent while treating a patient and insurance company refused to indemnify the doctor who did not bother to inform the insurance company about the negligence case filed against him. A complaint was filed by one Mr. Narayan Chandra Saha before a consumer forum in west Bengal against a doctor for negligence and succeeded in it,doctor was slapped with an amount of Rs 2, 67,750 as compensation by a Consumer forum in west Bengal. He filed an execution petition and after receiving the notice, doctor sent it to the insurance company for making the payment to the complainant as he had taken professional indemnity policy from New India Insurance Co. Insurance company refuses to pay the same as they were not informed by the doctor about the case filed against him, neither they were made party in the case. Doctor after refusal by the insurance company comes before the consumer forum alleging deficiency in services on the part of insurance company .Consumer forum allowed the complaint....

It was a death case of a young and talented boy of sixteen year old ,who died in 1996 due to medical negligence of doctors which came before the National commission for judication The boy was given spinal anesthesia for performing operation whereas such anesthesia is not allowed to the person of this age as per the medical literature available on the subject This wrong application resulted into death of the boy. But no negligence could be proved in this case in 1996 because Insurance companies jumped in to picture for defense of doctors with battery of eminent lawyers and raised number of preliminary objection and father of the boy was forced to compromise ultimately.This was a very unfortunate situation where Insurance companies being party in defense defended the genuine case of the complainant with full force without considering the pains of a father who lost his young son....

There had been number of occasions when Courts have said that insurance companies should not reject the claims marely on technical grounds and officers dealing with the case must apply their mind to find genuine claim . IRDIA too issues circulars from time to time and makes policy which maintain credibility of Insurance sector....

Year 2019 was a table - turning year when Consumer Protection Act 1986 was repealed and was replaced by the Act 2019. It was further a new chapter opened when it came into force in July 2020. Consequently year 2021 was full of queries ,debates and implementation problems arising out of new situations that emerged from repeal of old consumer protection act. Supreme Court has tried to solve all the matters which came before it for adjudication. It also took cognigence of some vital issues which were affecting the consumer rights in some or the other way and in spite of having such good law in their favour, they were sufferer at the end. Certain cases decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the year 2021 are bench-mark judgments which will ever be remembered history making law...

M/s Sheth M L Vaduwala Eye Hospital Versus Oriental Insurance Company Limited and Others SC JUDGMENT by J. Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J. Dt 11 Dec 2021., These appeals arise from a judgment of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission1 dated 26 February 2014. 3 The appellant is a charitable hospital registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act 1961. Between 21 and 23 June 2000, the appellant conducted an eye camp where cataract surgeries were performed on 112 patients....

Year 2019 was a table - turning year when Consumer Protection Act 1986 was repealed and was replaced by the Act 2019. It was further a new chapter opened when it came into force in July 2020. Consequently year 2021 was full of queries ,debates and implementation problems arising out of new situations that emerged from repeal of old consumer protection act. Supreme Court has tried to solve all the matters which came before it for adjudication. It also took cognigence of some vital issues which were affecting the consumer rights in some or the other way and in spite of having such good law in their favour, they were sufferer at the end. Certain cases decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the year 2021 are bench-mark judgments which will ever be remembered history making law...

Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next