Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: haryana state consumer disputes redressal commission scdrc panchkula Page 7 of about 71 results (0.137 seconds)

Feb 13 2014 (TRI)

The Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others Vs. Jai Singh

Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula

B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. Delay of 71 days in filing of the appeal is condoned. 2. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated October 11th, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, (for short District Forum), Fatehabad. 3. Jai Singh-complainant (respondent herein) purchased vehicle Bolero make bearing registration No.HR-34B/7804 from Sanjay by executing an agreement. An affidavit to this effect was also sworn by seller Sanjay. On the basis of the aforesaid documents, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited-opposite parties (appellants herein) insured the vehicle for the period October 29th, 2010 to October 28th, 2011 vide cover note Annexure-A. The respondent applied for transfer of the Certificate of Registration of the vehicle in his name to the Registeration Authority, Mahendergarh on December 9th, 2010 and the vehicle was transferred in respondents name on March 10th, 2011 (Annexure-B). Unfortunately, during the intervening period, the veh...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 2014 (TRI)

Dharambir Vs. Dr. Akhil Saxena and Others

Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula

Nawab Singh, President (Oral): 1. This complainants appeal is directed against the order dated July 31st, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, (for short District Forum), Sonepat, whereby an application filed under Section 24-A (2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the Act), for condonation of delay in filing of the complaint, was dismissed without dealing with the complaint on merits. 2. Section 24-A of the Act reads as under:- œ24-A. Limitation period“ (1) The District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), a complaint may be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1), if the complainant satisfies the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not filing the...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 2014 (TRI)

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. G.S. Virk

Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula

Nawab Singh, President (Oral): 1. Delay of four days in filing of the revision petition is condoned. 2. This opposite parties revision is directed against the order dated September 17th, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, (for short District Forum), Ambala, whereby the opposite parties (petitioners herein) were proceeded exparte and order dated November 25th, 2013 vide which the application filed for setting aside exparte order, was dismissed. 3. G.S. Virk-complainant (respondent herein) filed complaint before the District Forum claiming compensation with respect to his vehicle bearing registration No.HR-03-N/4200 of Skoda Fabia make, which was damaged during the subsistence of the Insurance Policy issued by the petitioners. 4. Despite service through notice, petitioners did not appear and were proceeded exparte vide order dated September 17th, 2013. 5. Petitioners filed an application for setting aside the impugned order which was dismissed by the District Foru...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 2014 (TRI)

M/S. Icici Prudential Life Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Veena Sharma and ...

Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula

B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. Whether the insured was suffering from diabetes at the time of submitting the proposal form for obtaining the Insurance Policy of which he was having knowledge at that time? This indeed is the significant question in this appeal. 2. Deepak Sharma (since deceased)-husband of complainant No.1“Mrs.Veena Sharma and father of complainant No.2-Abhishek Sharma (respondents herein) had purchased a Life Insurance Policy from M/s ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Ltd.-opposite party (appellant herein), known as SmartKid Policy for his son Abhishek Sharma for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-. The annual premium of Rs.12,000/- was to be paid for eleven years. Deepak Sharma deposited three instalments on dated May 11th, 2009, June 2nd, 2010 and June 7th, 2011. Deepak Sharma died on 8th of August, 2011. 3. Respondent No.1 submitted claim with the opposite party but the same was repudiated vide letter dated October 28th, 2011 (Exhibit R-4) on the ground that the Life ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 2014 (TRI)

The Manager, State Bank of India, Bhiwani Through Sh.S.L. Malhotra Vs. ...

Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula

B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the order dated September 3rd, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bhiwani (for short District Forum), whereby complaint filed by Satyender Pal-complainant (respondent herein) alleging excess withdrawal of Rs.5,000/- from his account, was accepted and following direction was issued to The Manager State Bank of India, Bhiwani-opposite party (appellant herein):- œ1. To refund Rs.5000/- to the complainant along with saving interest w.e.f. 2.4.2008 i.e. from the date of deduction till its final realization. 2. To pay Rs.1100/- as litigation charges. The compliance of the order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.? 2. Satyander Pal-respondent filed complaint with the allegations that he was maintaining saving bank account bearing account No.30064441369 with State Bank of India-appellant. On April 2nd, 2008, he withdrew a sum of Rs.15,000/- and ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 20 2014 (TRI)

National Insurance Company Limited and Another Vs. Amar Nath Garg

Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula

B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. Amar Nath Garg “ complainant (respondent herein) took a mediclaim Insurance Policy (Individual) known as Hospitalization Benefit Policy from National Insurance Company Limited-opposite parties (appellants herein) in March, 2009. The policy covered the respondent and his wife, having its validity from March 16th, 2009 to March 15th, 2010 and was further renewed from March 16th, 2010 to March 15th, 2011. 2. The respondent falling ill, was diagnosed as Epigastric Hernia and was advised operation. The operation was conducted on June 23rd, 2010 for œLAPROSCOPIC INTRAPERITIONEAL ONLAY MESH? and respondent remained admitted in Max Hospital, Delhi from June 22nd, 2010 to June 24th, 2010 and spent Rs.1,16,529.90 on his treatment. 3. Respondent lodged claim which was repudiated by the appellants vide letter dated September 27, 2010 (Exhibit C-23) which compelled the respondent-complainant to file complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 20 2014 (TRI)

Indian Farmers Fertilizer Cooperative Limited (iffco) Vs. Ram Swaroop

Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula

1. Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President (Oral)”This appeal has been filed by Indian Farmers Fertilizer Cooperative Limited, Service Centre, Kalanwali (for short IFFCO) against the order dated October 24th, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sirsa (for short District Forum) whereby, an amount of Rs. 42,000 was awarded to Ram Sawroop-complainant (respondent herein), on account of loss that occurred to his crop, Rs. 5,000 as compensation for harassment and Rs. 550 as litigation expenses. The amount awarded was to be paid within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failure to which interest at the rate of 9% per annum was awarded from the date of filing complaint, that is, October 26th, 2012 till payment. 2. Respondent had purchased 5 kgs of Guar Seed against payment of Rs. 2,000 from the appellant, which was sown in his field. The seed was found to be defective. He approached the office of Deputy Director, Agriculture, Sirsa. The Deputy ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 17 2014 (TRI)

Omaxe Limited Through Chairman and Managing and Others Vs. Parveen Kum ...

Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula

B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member (Oral): 1. The delay of 2 days in filing of the present appeal is condoned for the reasons stated in the application. 2. Omaxe Limited and others-opposite parties (appellants herein) are in appeal against the order dated October 4th, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad (for short District Forum). 3. Parveen Kumar Sodhi-complainant (respondent herein) booked a flat with the appellants in their upcoming project namely œOMAXE HILLS, FARIDABAD? Tower œRICHMOND? vide application Annexure A-10. The respondent paid Rs.10.00 lacs in March, 2005. On the asking of appellants, the respondent again paid a sum of Rs.2,80,000/- in July, 2006 and another sum of Rs.2,40,000/- again in July, 2006. The appellants allotted flat No.604 measuring 148.64 Sq. Meters (16090 Square feet) on 6th floor in œRICHMOND? Tower and Buyers Agreement Annexure A-1 was executed in May, 2007. Till 2009, the respondent had paid the amounts as and ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 13 2014 (TRI)

icici Bank Pvt. Limited Vs. Bhatia Electricals, Karnal, Through Its Pa ...

Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula

B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member (Oral): 1. This appeal is before us in view of remand order dated September 12, 2013 passed by Honble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi. 2. ICICI Bank Pvt. Ltd. “opposite party No.1 (appellant herein) has come up in appeal against the order dated December 1st, 2010 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Karnal (for short District Forum). 3. Bhatia Electricals, Karnal “complainant (respondent No.1 herein) presented two cheques dated 16.06.2008 and 1.7.2008 for Rs.2.00 lacs and Rs.53,000/- respectively drawn on The Karnal Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. to the appellant for encashment on 23.06.2008. The cheques were issued by Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, Risalwa District Karnal in favour of the respondent No.1. However, the cheques were misplaced during transaction and were not encashed. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the appellant as well respondent No.2, respondent No.1 filed complaint under Section...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 13 2014 (TRI)

B.K. Sood-husband Vs. Alchemist Hospital and Others

Court : Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Panchkula

B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member: 1. B.K. Sood-complainant (appellant herein) has come up in appeal against the order dated June 24th, 2013 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Panchkula (for short District Forum) whereby complaint filed by him alleging medical negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties No.1 to 3 (respondents herein) was dismissed. 2. Smt. Bala Sood (since deceased, hereinafter referred to as patient)-wife of appellant was under the treatment of Medical Specialist, General Hospital, Sector-6, Panchkula. On January 23rd, 2011 she fell in the bathroom and was admitted in Alchemist Hospital-respondent No.1 on 20.02.2011 at 5.30 A.M. The doctor on duty (EMO) in triage examined the patient and did ECG which was found normal. The ECG was shown to doctor on duty in Cardiac ICU who told that since there was no chest pain and the ECG was normal, a cardiac event looked unlikely. The RMO doctor on duty in triage then called Dr. Achint Nara...

Tag this Judgment!


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