Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract act 1872 Court: tamil nadu state consumer disputes redressal commission scdrc chennai Year: 2011 Page 1 of about 74 results (0.036 seconds)

May 09 2011 (TRI)

The Post Master, Salem Head Post Office and Others Vs. G.A. Porkodi an ...

Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

Decided on : May-09-2011

..... per the reported judgement in air 2007 gujarat 72 and 4 (2006) page 216 nc in which it is stated as follows :- ?? ??consumer protection act, 1986 ?? section 2(1)(g) ?? nsc 6th issue rules, 1989 ?? rules 4, 11 ?? contract act, 1872 ?? sections 72, 73 ?? securities ?? nscs ?? issuance of certificates in contravention of rules ?? entitlement to interest ?? nscs issued to town area ..... not refusing to issue nscs, opposite parties guilty of deficiency in service ?? liable to compensate complainant for loss occasioned on such account ?? provisions of sections 72, 73 of act of 1872 attracted opposite party liable to pay principal amount ?? towards compensation, no option but to award sum equivalent to inerest payable on maturity of nscs. ? ??mahila sewa sahakari ..... award passed by the opposite parties. the complainants counsel also relied upon ruling reported in 1998 (1) cpj page 107 (nc) in which it is stated as follows :- ?? consumer protection act 1986 ?? sections 14(1)(d) ?? compensation ?? national saving scheme ?? post office deposits ?? interest ?? national saving scheme rules, 1987 ?? rules 3 and 4 ?? post office savings bank general ..... bank ltd. v. chief post master and ors. spl. civil appln. no.11574 of 2006 d/- 10-8-2006. government savings certificates act (46 of 1959), s.12 ?? kisan vikas .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 2011 (TRI)

The Sub Postmaster and Another Vs. the Special Officer

Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

Decided on : Apr-29-2011

..... reported in air 2007 gujarat 72 and 4 2006 cpj 216 (nc) were also cited in which it is stated as follows :- ??consumer protection act, 1986 ?? section 2(1)(g) ?? nsc 6th issue rules, 1989 ?? rules 4, 11 ?? contract act, 1872 ?? sections 72, 73 ?? securities ?? nscs ?? issuance of certificates in contravention of rules ?? entitlement to interest ?? nscs issued to town area in contravention ..... rules and not refusing to issue nscs, opposite parties guilty of deficiency in service ?? liable to compensate complainant for loss occasioned on such account ?? provisions of sections 72, 73 of act of 1872 attracted opposite party liable to pay principal amount ?? towards compensation, no option but to award sum equivalent to inerest payable on maturity of nscs. ? ??mahila sewa sahakari bank ltd ..... those deposits were wrongly received against the rules and asked for the option to receive the amount with the savings bank interest rate and thereby the 1st opposite party had acted in the fraudulent manner and by keeping the deposit for 5 years to 6 years and after demanding the amount made a request for collecting the amount with the ..... . v. chief post master and ors. spl. civil appln. no.11574 of 2006 d/- 10-8-2006. government savings certificates act (46 of 1959), s.12 ?? kisan vikas patra rules (1988), .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 2011 (TRI)

Life Insurance Corporation of India, Rep. by Its Branch Manager and Ot ...

Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

Decided on : Apr-01-2011

..... of 1938), s.45 ?? insurance policy ?? repudiation ?? deliberate wrong answer given by insured having a great bearing on contract of insurance ?? policy may be repudiated. (b) evidence act (1 of 1872) s.115 ?? estoppel ?? contract of life insurance ?? person making a wrong statement with knowledge of consequence therefor ?? estopped from pleading that even if such a fact had been disclosed, it would not ..... entitle the insurer to repudiate his liability because there is clear presumption that any information sought for in the proposal form is material for the purpose of entering into a contract of insurance. ? those rulings even though applicable in principle as general, but in view of the facts and circumstances of the case in our case, those cannot be ..... the grounds of appeal among other things it was contended that the district forum failed to know that the suppression of material facts in the proposal form would render the contract of insurance illegal void abinitio and unenforceable and erroneously allowed the complaint. 7. while considering both sides contentions, averments and other details, the admitted facts of the case of ..... of health he has given answer as ??good ? suppressing the facts that he was suffering from brain tumor and bronchial asthma. since he has violated the terms of the contract and declaration and proposal for insurance was not correct and hence the claim was repudiated. 5. on the basis of the materials placed before the district forum it had allowed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 2011 (TRI)

M.V. Sellumuthu, Prop.M.V.S.Nagar Annex Vs. T.K. Uppiliappan and Anoth ...

Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

Decided on : Aug-29-2011

..... reasons, as rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant, the complainant is not a consumer and there was no service undertaking or contract between the parties and the non-execution of the sale deed cannot be considered as deficiency in service but incorrectly recorded by the district forum ..... come forward with this complaint. 3. the opposite party denied the allegations of the complainant and as per the agreement for breach of contract the complainant should approach the civil court and this forum has no jurisdiction and the other claims are not maintainable the complaint to be ..... vs. r.p.sharma compensation and claim in respect of breach of contract under the consumer protection act 1986 under sec.17 does not constitute consumer dispute. the matter was purely in the realm of breach of contract and it did not constitute a consumer dispute as envisaged by the provision ..... reported ii (1993) cpj 679 under the consumer protection act 1986 sec 17 of the complaint ?? breach of contract ?? complaint filed alleging breaching of contract of remedy available in civil courts and held on the question ??whether there is breach of contract if that is so what are the damages suffered ..... of the consumer protection act. the complainant should have been referred to pursue his ordinary remedy by way of instituting .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 13 2011 (TRI)

The Senior Service Engineer M/S. Johnson Lifts Ltd. Vs. S. Gopalakrish ...

Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

Decided on : Jan-13-2011

..... provider for the bharani apartments, opposed the complainant, on the ground, with among other grounds, that there is no privity of contract, between themselves, and the complainant, and as per the definition available under consumer protection act, the complainant cannot be a consumer, that as per the instruction of the secretary of the flat owners association, they have ..... when the party to the agreement had requested to disconnect, they did so, which cannot be termed as negligent act, or deficiency, thereby praying for the dismissal of the complaint, denying other averments also. 4. the district forum, ignoring the contract between the flat owners association, and the opposite party, taking a strange conclusion, that the secretary of the ..... association, cannot act against the interest of the user, deduced a conclusion, as if the opposite party had committed deficiency, resulting ..... submission of the learned counsel for the appellant, that if at all the complainant should have proceeded only against the secretary of the association, at whose instance, a contract was entered into, between the flat owners association, represented by the secretary, with the opposite party, at whose instruction alone, they have disconnected the service connection, and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 27 2011 (TRI)

N. Mahaveerchand Dugar Vs. M/S. Coronet Construction (India) Pvt. Ltd. ...

Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

Decided on : Apr-27-2011

..... as inadmissible, are not binding upon the parties since not concluded in the absence of acceptance of the agreement, we cannot enforce the terms of the contract, and so, the complainant is not entitled to deliver of possession of the flat, said to have been undertaken, to be constructed and handed over ..... of action against the law is taken, then there is no purpose in prescribing the period of limitation under the act. a person can wait, according to his choice from the date of contract and issue a notice after 10 years, if that is to be taken as saving point of limitation, there ..... for helping the forum misused by the complainant, for the recovery of the money, for which, the forum was not established, under the consumer protection act. thus, viewing the case from all possible and proper angles, we are of the considered opinion, that the complainant is neither a consume,r nor ..... agreement between the parties for construction of the flat and handing over, supported by consideration the non-delivery of the flat, cannot be construed as negligent act or deficiency in service, praying for the dismissal of the complaint. 4. the opposite party in the additional written version, would contend that even as ..... is no meaning in prescribing the limitation under the act. in certain cases, the cause of action may arise, after the contractual .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 2011 (TRI)

K. Minakshi Sundaram Vs. the General Manager, Bank of India

Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

Decided on : Feb-10-2011

..... is also baseless and improper understanding of law. no law prohibits or bars the bank from exercising the general lien, as available under the contract act, even in respect of barred debt. the question, whether a claim is barred or not, will come, when the creditor sues for ..... or not renewing the transaction periodically will not give any relief, to the complainant and under the guise, there was no effective contract or loan agreement, when the loan itself was admitted, not discharged, and the complainant is not entitled to escape. so the submissions ..... benefit on the debtor as contemplated by the section ? . though the limitation act is not made applicable to the consumer protection act since main defence of the complainant was, the debt or the contract was barred by time, and therefore, the opposite party cannot exercise the general ..... not contain necessary required particulars, to attract the consumer dispute. in this view, further concluding, that the complainant failed to establish the negligent act, and deficiency in service, dismissed the complaint, on 28.01.2010, which is challenged on various grounds by the complainant, in this ..... lien and to repudiate the same alone, we have pointed out the supreme court rulings as placed before us. 15. in the case of a consumer dispute, we are concerned mainly, in this kind of case, the service availed or hired for consideration followed by negligent act .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 01 2011 (TRI)

Hdfc Standard Life Insurance Vs. Sujatha and Others

Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

Decided on : Feb-01-2011

..... i (2010) cpj page 137 national consumer disputes redressal commission, new delhi, in which it was held as follows :- ??consumer protection act, 1986 ?? section 21 ?? life insurance ?? concluded contract ?? policy underwritten and dispatched after death of proposer, without knowledge of death ?? acceptance of proposal never communicated during lifetime of proposer ?? ..... thereby there was no acceptance of proposal by the appellant/insurance company and in the circumstances it is obvious that there is no contract of insurance between the parties fulfilled and thereby there cannot be any claim on behalf of the proposer or alleged insured. 8. ..... insurance and depositing the first premium with insurance company does not create a binding contract unless it had accepted the proposal. as far as our case is concerned the proposal made by the deceased sadhasivam on 27.1 ..... of india vs. raja vasireddy komalavalli kamba and ors. air 1984 sc 1014 it is held : ?? the general rule is that the contract of insurance will be concluded only when the party to whom an offer has been made accepts it unconditionally and communicates his acceptance to ..... could not be communicated to (deceased) proposer ?? no concluded contract of insurance exists between parties ?? no relief entitled. ? 7. in all those rulings it is pointed out mere filling in proposal for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 28 2011 (TRI)

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., by Its Divisional Manager Vs. P.J. S ...

Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

Decided on : Jan-28-2011

..... date, there was no privity of contract between the complainant and the opposite party and on that basis, when a claim was made, it was repudiated legally, justifiably, cannot be quoted as covered ..... had taken place on 6.4.2003, that is within 10 days or we can say within 14 days, that is within the permissible time under the act. when the subsequent purchaser, had the right to transfer or informto the insurer within 14 days, before that, the accident had taken place and therefore, ..... consumer, which is sought to be set aside, mostly relying upon section 157 of motor vehicle act. it is also an admitted fact, that on the date of the accident namely 6.4.2003, there was no contract of insurance between the complainant and the opposite party though the vehicle had coverage on that date ..... that the complainant has not transfer the policy or informed the purchase of the vehicle within 14 days, as contemplated under section 157 of the motor vehicle act, 1988, and before the transaction of the policy or before taking the new policy, the vehicle met with an accident on 6.4.2003, on which ..... . in this context, we have to see, section 157 of motor vehicle act, 1988, which comes under the chapter-xi ??insurance of motor vehicle .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 28 2011 (TRI)

M.Muthuramalingam Vs. the Branch Manager, Icici Bank Limited, T.Nagar ...

Court : Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

Decided on : Jan-28-2011

..... balance from the s.b. account certain amount was adjusted by the bank as lien by debiting the amount automatically without notice, which is permitted under the sec.171 of contract act under which general power of lien can be exercised and when the complainant failed to establish that there was no dues towards credit card account as per the settlement arrived .....

Tag this Judgment!


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