Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract act 1872 Court: andhra pradesh state consumer disputes redressal commission scdrc hyderabad Year: 2011 Page 5 of about 55 results (0.045 seconds)

Nov 29 2011 (TRI)

M/S. Navya Chaitanya Housing (P) Ltd., Rep. by Its Managing Director V ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Nov-29-2011

..... in sai laxmi nagar on payment of balance amount, but did not do so. it is the complainants case that the opposite party failed to perform his part of the contract which constitutes deficiency of service on behalf of the opposite party. it is the appellant/opp.partys case that the company has become defunct. we observe from the record that ..... the opposite party did not cancel the membership of the complainant nor refunded the amount and therefore the cause of action as per article 54 of the limitation act is continuing as the date of limitation begins from the date on which the agreement is cancelled which in the instant case did not take place. therefore we are of ..... notice was sent to the opposite party it was returned as ??addressee left without instructions. it is the last known address and as per section 28(a) of c.p.act notice is served on the last known address and there are no instructions given by the opposite party, it is deemed to be served. except for stating that the company .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 2011 (TRI)

The Branch Manager United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. N. Malyadri

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Sep-19-2011

..... registered with rta, nellore bearing chassis no. fed 101965 and engine no. r3c16921 vide ex. a2 certificate of registration, and the same was carried in ex. a3 permitting him as contract carriage by rta, nellore. when he lost the vehicle he gave report to the police. it seems he gave report on 21.11.2003 under fir ex. a6 after extensively ..... rama krishna was also appointed. no permission whatsoever was taken from irda while appointing the second surveyor/investigator as envisaged u/s 64 um of insurance act. the appointment is contrary to provisions of the act and as such it has no validity under law. simply because there was discrepancy in the engine no. the claim of the complainant cannot be rejected .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 2011 (TRI)

M/S the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs. M/S Sahiti Trading Corporati ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Jan-27-2011

..... should, in all events, be denied indemnification. the misuse of the vehicle was somewhat irregular though, but not so fundamental in nature so as to put an end to the contract, unless some factors existed which, by themselves, had gone to contribute to the causing of the accident. in the instant case, however, we find no such contributory factor. 11. in ..... preferred the appeal contending that as per the terms of the insurance policy risk is covered for the goods vehicle under the permit and within the meaning of motor vehicles act and at the time of the accident six persons were traveling in the vehicle and as such there was violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. 7 ..... at `39,500/-. since the vehicle was used against the policy conditions, permit and provisions of the motor vehicles act the repudiation of the claim made by them is justified. as per the police records six persons were traveling in the van at the time of the accident and hence ..... was a goods vehicle and it covers the risk while the vehicle is used in terms of the permit and within the meaning of the provisions of the m.v.act. the policy covers the risk of two employees i.e., driver and cleaner. after receipt of intimation of the accident, the opposite party , appointed a surveyor who estimated the damages .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 2011 (TRI)

M/S.Jana Harsha Estates Construction Pvt.Ltd., Rep by Its Chairman and ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Aug-29-2011

..... appellants either cancelled her membership or allotment in writing. they did not refund the amount stating that she was irregular in payment and they were not bound to keep the contract alive. when they have been receiving the amounts, they cannot turn round and say that the complainant was irregular and did not pay the instalment amounts promptly. obviously when the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 2011 (TRI)

Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., Personal Department and Others Vs. ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Aug-01-2011

..... in the accident and secondly the negligence of the doctors of the appellant hospital as also the effect of their negligence in administering the treatment to the first respondent in contract to the subsequent treatment that the first respondent had undergone at the hospital of the respondent no.2 and the nims. 23. the learned counsel for the appellant hospital has .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 11 2011 (TRI)

Sri. Koduru Subba Reddy and Another Vs. Sri. Mamidi Janardhan Reddy an ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Nov-11-2011

..... party no.3 submitted that after completion of the house slab, another rs.10,00,000/- has to be given but the complainant failed to perform his part of the contract. opposite party no.3 submitted that the complainant is due an amount of rs.1,80,000/- towards foundation and rs.24,00,000/- towards completed house slabs, partitions and ..... be sustained. it is the opposite parties 1 and 2 i.e. land owners case that no consideration has been paid to them and that there is no privity of contract between the complainant and them and hence no deficiency in service can be attributed to them. they filed ex.b1, power of attorney by which the first opposite party represents .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 25 2011 (TRI)

Prasad Homes Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Devidas Chandak and Another

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : May-25-2011

..... had invented a story that there was a collection boy to collect the instalments and that opposite party no.1 suddenly stopped deputing the boy to get over breach of contract. opposite party no.1 submitted that it does not have any office or branch at nizamabad as such maintaining a collection boy for collecting instalments does not arise. the legal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 24 2011 (TRI)

The New India Assurance Co., Ltd., Rep. by Its Manager, D.O. and Anoth ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Aug-24-2011

..... , vs. asha goel (smt) and another ? reported in (2001) 2 scc page 160 has held that ??the duty to disclose material fact continues right up to the conclusion of the contract and also implies any material alteration in the character of the risk which may take place between the proposal and its acceptance. if there are any mis-statements or suppression ..... obtained for the sum worth exceeding one crore rupees. the suppression of the fact in this regard is a material fact and it would go to the root of the contract invalidating it consequent upon which the respondent is not entitled to claim any amount under the insurance policy. 13. the respondent has suppressed the fact from the appellant insurance company ..... facts relating to the other party which would influence and have direct bearing upon the decision to proceed to form the contract. obiviously, the respondent and his deceased wife are supposed to declare the fact of their obtaining the other insurance policies from other insurance companies to the appellant insurance company so ..... the fact of their obtaining other insurance policies which were taken for such a huge sum assured as of `1,20,00,000/-. essentially, the parties are to an insurance contract are required to be fair as the principle of ubberima fides is applicable to both the insured and the insurer as one party does not have knowledge of the material .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 2011 (TRI)

Bhusireddy Ramakrishna Reddy Vs. the Branch Manager Lic of Branch Offi ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Nov-08-2011

..... % as was used to be awarded on the amount awarded as compensation in motor vehicle accident claims. the complaint is filed by virtue of the insurance policy which is a contract whereunder the respondent corporation assured the insured that it would pay a sum of rs.5 lakh on happening of any of the events mentioned therein. compared to the contractual .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 24 2011 (TRI)

Sri Krishna Teja Dental College Rep. by Its Managing Director/Managing ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Decided on : Oct-24-2011

..... the same bds course in another college. either way, both the parties are at fault and negligent as well in taking steps for performance of their respective part of the contract. 14. the learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the seat vacated by the respondent was kept unfilled for the entire course and thereby the appellant college had sustained .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //