Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: goa state consumer disputes redressal commission scdrc panaji Page 3 of about 58 results (0.255 seconds)

Mar 13 2014 (TRI)

Prakash N. Kanchagar and Another Vs. M/S. D.S. Naik Associates

Court : Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panaji

N.A. Britto, President: 1. This consumer complaint filed on 22/03/2013 is being disposed off by this order. 2. Some facts are required to be stated to dispose off this complaint. 3. OP No.1 is a Builder and OP No. 2 and 3 are the owners of the land of chalta no.14, P.T. sheet no.92 of Margao City Survey. Under an agreement dated 10/02/2003 styled as an agreement for development and sale with the said owners, the Builder, OP No.1, has carried out development upon the said property and has constructed a building known as œ Damodar Arcade?, Building `A and `B. 4. The Complainants by agreement for sale dated 16/12/2003 have purchased from the Builder flats identified as MF “ 1 and 2 in the said building and by addendum dated 26/01/2004 have purchased a garage/stilt parking in Building `B admeasuring about 12 sq.mts., and, the Complainants have been put in possession of the said flat and the said garage on or about 25/02/2005 and there is no dispute about it. 5. The Complainants...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 2014 (TRI)

Hyundai Motor India Limited, Through Its Authorized Signatory and Anot ...

Court : Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panaji

N.A. Britto, President: 1. These appeals can be conveniently disposed off by this common order. F.A. No.03/2014 has been filed by OP No.1, and F.A. No.05/2014 has been filed by OP No.2, in CC. No. 31/12. OP No.1 is the manufacturer and OP No.2 is the dealer. 2. Some more facts are required to be stated to dispose off the appeals. 3. The Complainant purchased from OP No.2, the dealer, an i10 Car (automatic gears) on 22/02/2012 for a sum of Rs.5,03,062/- and registered the same under reg. no.GA-08K-0126. The car had power steering. 4. The Complainant found, after about 10 days, that the steering had a problem in that the steering wheel was not rotating smoothly and whenever the steering wheel was turned right or left, it would not come back to its normal original position. The Complainant, therefore, wrote a letter on 01/03/2012 complaining about the said defect. The Complainant then took the car to OP No.2, dealer, with the said complaint of hard steering on 02/03/2012 and again for the...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 2014 (TRI)

Volvitta Gomes Vs. Skylark Apartments and Others

Court : Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panaji

N.A. Britto, President: 1. Application for execution filed by the Appellant/DH on 20/10/10 has been dismissed by the South Goa District Forum by order dated 10/10/13 and hence this appeal against the same. 2. The Appellant/DH had booked a flat with the OPs in their SkyLark Apartments at Margao, being flat No. B-7 on the second floor admeasuring 80 sq.mtRs.The Appellant filed the complaint on 30/3/1998 for the following reliefs: "a) That the O.P. be directed to handover the vacant and peaceful possession of Flat No. B-7 on the second floor admeasuring 80 sq.m. in Skylark Apartments at Margao Goa. b) That the O.P. be directed to pay Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) as damages to the complainant. c) Other and further order be passed as deemed fit and proper. d) Costs of the petition." 3. The Lr. South Goa District Forum by order dated 23/07/07 allowed the complaint partly and ordered the OPs to handover vacant and peaceful possession of the flat No. B-7 on the second floor admeasu...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 2014 (TRI)

Anant Prabhakar Malik Vs. Priority Automobiles (i) Pvt. Ltd. and Anoth ...

Court : Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panaji

N.A. Britto, President: 1. This consumer complaint filed on 26/4/13 is being disposed off by this order. 2. The facts are hardly in dispute. The complainant purchased on 6/9/11 a diesel car Laura F/L Elegance 2.0 CRDI from OP No. 1, the dealer, manufactured by OP No. 2 for a sum of Rs.16,43,086/- and registered the same under No. GA-04-C-4510. The complainant also paid a sum of Rs.98,585/- towards road tax and Rs.21,388/- towards insurance premium and renewed the policy for a further period from 7/9/12 to 6/9/13 by paying a sum of Rs.18,632/-. The car had a two year warranty. 3. The complainant is a businessman and has a petrol pump and a metal quarry situated at Chandgad in Kolhapur and travels a lot. The complainants car as on 4/9/12 had done about 35844 kms and on that day at about 9.30 a.m. when the complainant was on his way from Panaji to Sawantwadi, Complainants car suddenly stopped at Naibag, Pernem, and, no sign came on the dash board indicating the type of problem, though suc...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 25 2014 (TRI)

Dr. D.J. De Souza Vs. Cadila Health Care Ltd.

Court : Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panaji

N.A. Britto, President: 1. The Petitioner herein is the original Complainant in C.C. No.28/2001. 2. The short question for our consideration is whether the Complainant is entitled to the sum deposited in terms of the 2nd Proviso to Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in addition to the decreetal amount/ or the amount due as per the final order? 3. Some facts are required to be stated to answer the said question. 4. The Petitioner as Complainant had filed a complaint for refund of a sum of Rs.47,196/- being the cost of defective microscope purchased from the respondent/OP with interest @ 18% and Rs.5,000/- as compensation. 5. The complaint was decreed by an order dated 02/06/2003 and what was prayed for was granted to the Complainant. 6. The respondent/OP preferred an appeal against the said order of the Lr. District Forum dated 02/06/2003, being FA No.40/2003 and at the time of filing of the said appeal, the respondent/OP deposited a sum of Rs.25,000/- on 21/07/2003 but the...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 13 2014 (TRI)

India Infoline Limited Vs. Vaman Nagesh Usapkar and Others

Court : Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panaji

N.A. Britto, President: 1. The applicant herein is OP No. 1 in CC No. 126/2009, and, by application filed on 20/12/13 seeks condonation of delay of 365 days. 2. We have heard Shri. Gaitonde, the lr. advocate of the Applicant/OP No. 1, and Shri. Shirodkar, the lr. advocate of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2/complainants. No notice was issued to Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. 3. Shri. Gaitonde, the lr. advocate, would submit that the applicant did not get free certified copy of the impugned order dated 18/10/12. Lr. advocate submits that they came to know about the impugned order only on or about 28/10/13 when they received the notice in MA/09/13 filed under Section 27 of C.P. Act which was returnable on 12/11/13. Lr. advocate would submit that thereafter the Applicant/OP No. 1 pursued the matter diligently and filed the present appeal with application for condonation of delay. 4. On the other hand, Shri. Shirodkar, the lr. advocate of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2/Complainants, submits that the Applicant/O...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 2014 (TRI)

Eusebia Cardozo Vs. Aviva Life Insurance

Court : Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panaji

N.A. Britto, President: 1. Consumer complaint filed by the Complainant for refund of premium paid of Rs.49,000/- with interest @ 18% has been dismissed by order dated 29/11/13 of the Lr. South Goa District Forum. Hence this appeal. 2. Some facts need to be stated to dispose off this appeal. Parties hereto are referred to in the names as they appear in the cause title of the complaint. 3. The Complainant obtained from the OP, a 5 year Insurance Policy known as Pension Plus “ Unit Linked, starting from 10/03/08. Premium to be paid was annually for a period of 5 years. The annual premium to be paid was of Rs.49,000/-. The next premium was due on or about 09/03/09. The last premium was due on 10/03/2012. Premium was to be invested by the OP in Pension Plan Funds and Pension Growth Funds on 50 : 50 basis. 4. The said policy had what is known as free look period for 15 days or in other words a right to reconsider. 5. The Complainant was informed that her application for Life Insurance ...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 2014 (TRI)

Harinder Pal Singh Sandhu Vs. Luisa Cristina Fernandes and Others

Court : Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panaji

A. Britto, President: 1. These Revisions can be conveniently disposed off by this common order. 2. Revision Petition No.07/13 is directed against orders dated 17/10/2006 (ordering attachment), 13/08/2007 (dismissing applicants objections) 29/10/2007 (correcting the description of the property) and 17/01/2008 (handing over the possession of the suit flat to Respondent No.5/ Purchaser) of the Lr. District Forum in Execution Application No.05/06 arising from C. C. No.105/2000. S.M. Revision Petition No.01/2014 is directed against Final Order dated 27/04/05 in the said C.C. 3. The Applicant had earlier filed a revision petition before this Commission being RA No.12/2007, and, thereafter the Applicant filed a writ petition bearing no. 92/2008 before the High Court of Bombay at Goa, and, with a view to pursue the said writ petition, the Applicant, later withdrew the revision petition on 13/03/2008. 4. The writ petition was not entertained by the High Court by its order dated 29/01/2013. Neve...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 2014 (TRI)

M/S. Shantadurga Traders (Through Its Proprietor Kalpesh Sawant) Vs. U ...

Court : Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panaji

N.A. Britto, President: 1. Consumer complaint filed by the complainant on 17/12/10 has been dismissed by the Lr. North Goa District Forum by order dated 30/10/13, and aggrieved by the same, the complainant has filed this appeal. 2. Some facts need to be stated to dispose off the appeal. 3. The Appellant/Complainant has a small establishment known as M/s. Shantadurga Traders, situated at Munang Waddo, at Assagao, Goa, dealing in hardware items. The complainant obtained from the OP (Opposite Party) a shopkeepers insurance policy for a sum of Rs.1 lac by paying a premium of Rs.1,393/- effective from 26/12/08. 4. On 21/01/09 at about 11.30 p.m. fire took place in the shop premises of the complainant and the fire was brought under control and extinguished with the help of friends and well wisheRs.On the next day i.e. 22/01/09, the complainant intimated the OP, the insurer, about the fire accident and on the same day the OP deputed a surveyor Shri. Pai Vernekar who visited the shop of the co...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 29 2014 (TRI)

Leticia Mascarenhas and Another Vs. Ravindra Karkal

Court : Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panaji

N.A. Britto, President: 1. This appeal is filed by the Opposite Parties (OPs) in CC No. 40/12, and, is directed against order dated 26/11/13 by which the OPs have been directed to obtain the occupancy certificate, and hand over the same to the complainant within 30 days failing which they have also been directed to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- to the complainant every month of the delay caused in handing over the occupancy certificate. Costs of Rs.5000/- have also been imposed on the OPs. 2. Shri. M. N. Dessai, the lr. advocate of the OPs has made three submissions. 3. Some facts are required to be stated to consider the same and to dispose off this appeal, and for that, the parties to this appeal are being referred to in the names as they appear in the cause title of the complaint. 4. The OPs are mother and son and as Owner and Developer respectively, entered into an agreement dated 23/09/1999 with the complainant who was their tenant and who was occupying block No. 2 in their property havi...

Tag this Judgment!


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