Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: maharashtra state consumer disputes redressal commission scdrc aurangabad Page 5 of about 120 results (0.201 seconds)

Feb 28 2014 (TRI)

Digambar Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. Throu ...

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

S.M. Shembole, Presiding Judicial Member: 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 08.01.2008 passed by District Consumer Forum, Nanded dismissing consumer complaint No.222/2008. (for the sake of brevity the appellant hereinafter referred as œcomplainant? and the respondents as œopponents?) 2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that, the complainant Shri. Digambar Jadhav is a consumer of opponent having electric connection in his field bearing consumer No.AG-568660015805. According to the complainant in the year 2007-08 he had grown sugarcane and other crops in his field by irrigating the field with the help of electric pump. However, in the month of Dec.2007 the opponents disconnected his electric supply on the ground that he made default in payment bill of electricity charges. Therefore his entire crops are damaged sustaining him loss of Rs.2,65,000/-. Therefore alleging deficiency in service on the part of opponents the complainant filed co...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2014 (TRI)

L.i.C. of India, Through Its Branch Manager Vs. Siddharth Madhavrao Dh ...

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

S.M. Shembole, Presiding Judicial Member: 1. Challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated 24.10.2008 passed by District Consumer Forum Aurangabad allowing consumer complaint No.157/2008 directing appellant/opponent LIC to pay to the complainant amount of Rs.1,50,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. with effect from 23.1.2008 which he incurred for medical expenses and further Rs.2000/- towards cost of the proceeding. (For the sake of brevity appellant is hereinafter referred as opponent LIC and respondent as complainant) 2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that:- On 28.5.2004 complainant Siddharth had taken Jeevan Mitra (Triple cover Endowment Plan) policy of "critical illness rider" covering risk of Rs.1,50,000/- from opponent LIC. It was under plan No.133 bearing policy No.984077036. It was for the period 2005-2006. On 25.11.2006 i.e. during the subsistence of policy complainant had heart attack and was required to be admitted in Government Super Specialist Hospital...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2014 (TRI)

i.D.B.i. Bank Ltd. Vs. Abhinav Anil Borkar

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

S.M. Shembole, Presiding Judicial Member: 1. Challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated 4.2.2010 passed by District Consumer Forum Aurangabad allowing consumer complaint No.305/2009 directing appellant/org.opponent bank to repay amount of processing fee to the respondent/complainant. (For the sake of brevity appellant is herein after referred as opponent bank and respondent as complainant) 2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that:- On 10.11.2008 complainant has applied with opponent bank for housing loan submitting requisite documents with processing fee charges of Rs.8989/-. Thereafter opponent bank processed the documents and rejected loan proposal on the ground that default was found in the credit card which was issued by IDBI bank in favour of complainant. Accordingly, on 18.12.2008 complainant was informed. Therefore alleging deficiency in service on the part of opponent bank, complainant filed consumer complaint claiming refund of processing fee of Rs....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2014 (TRI)

The Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Anil Avtram Katariya

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

K.B. Gawali, Member: 1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 09/04/2009 passed by the Dist. Consumer Forum Dhule in CC.No. 415/2008 whereby the complaint is partly allowed by holding appellant insurance company as liable for deficiency in service. The respondent herein is the original complainant. For better understanding the appellant is hereinafter termed as the œopponent insurance company? whereas the respondent as the œComplainant?. 2. It is the case of the complainant that he had obtained insurance policy by name Ashadeep with accidental benefit bearing No. 961055414 which was in operation for the period from 23/08/2004 to 223/08/2029 for the sum assured of Rs 2,00,000/- . As per the said policy during the period of its subsistence the complainant was entitled to receive 50 % of the sum assured i.e. Rs 1,00,000/- towards the expenditure of operation and hospitalization and further 10 % of assured sum i.e. 20,000/- per year for medical expenditu...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2014 (TRI)

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. Through Its As ...

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

K.B. Gawali, Member: 1. This appeal is filed by the original opponent No. 1 against the judgment and order dated 29/09/2007 passed by the Dist. Consumer Forum Nanded in CC.No. 19/2007 whereby the complaint is partly allowed and appellant is held for the deficiency in service. Respondent herein is the original complainant. For the sake of brevity the appellant who is the officer of the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd is herein after termed as the opponent œMSEDCL? whereas the respondent is termed as the œcomplainant?. 2. The brief facts leading to the present appeal are that the Complainant who is the resident of Unchegaon Tq. Hadgaon Dist. Nanded. That, on 06/11/2006 when the complainant in his bullock cart was going out side the said village, either of the bullocks received electric shock and was died on the spot. It was contended that, there was some defects in the electric line due to which the electric current had entered in to the electric pole s...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2014 (TRI)

Prakash Bapu Choudhari Vs. Chakravarti Medical Center

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

Uma S. Bora, Member: 1. Shri.Prakash Bapu Choudhary appellant herein/original complainant preferred this appeal against the order of dismissal of complaint case No.228/07 passed by District Consumer Forum Ahmednagar on 19.12.2007. 2. The facts in nutshell are as under: "Mother of complainant Devubai Bapu Choudhary aged 58 years was suffering from abdominal pains. Therefore with reference letter given by Dr.Sonawane complainant approached to respondent Dr.B.M.Chakrawarti running Chakrawarti Medical Centre at Ahmednagar. On 1.2.2007 Devubai was admitted in respondent hospital. Respondent conducted investigation and performed various test like sonography, C.T.Scan, and found that there is tumour in the stomach of Devubai, to remove the said tumour she was required to be operated. For the said surgery expenses of Rs.25,000/- or Rs.30,000/- were required to be done by the complainant. Accordingly on 7.2.2007 Devubai was operated. It is alleged by the complainant that Devubai was operated by...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 25 2014 (TRI)

Superintending Engineer and Another Vs. M/S. Mahavir Jinning Pressing ...

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

K.B. Gawali, Member: 1. This appeal is filed by original opponents who are officers of MSEDCL against the judgment and order dated 30.5.2008 passed by District Consumer Forum Jalgaon in C.C.No.103/2008 whereby the complainant is partly allowed by holding appellant as liable for deficiency in service. For the better understanding appellants are hereinafter termed as "opponents" whereas respondent is hereinafter termed as "complainant". 2. Facts leading to the present appeal in a nutshell are that, complainant was running ginning and pressing factory for which he had obtained electric connection from opponents having consumer No.1100190003124. That, he used to pay electricity bills regularly. It was contended that his said factory was remained closed in the month of July 2007 and therefore the electric bill for the said month should have been 'nil' as reading of the meter was to be 'zero'. However, bill for the said month of July 2007 amounting to Rs.71376/- was issued by opponents. That...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 24 2014 (TRI)

State Bank of India Vs. Prakash Dhondiram Bhosale

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

S.M. Shembole, Presiding Judicial Member: 1. Challenge in both these appeals is the judgment and order dated 19.5.2009 passed by District Consumer Forum Ahmednagar allowing consumer complaint No.18/09 directing opponent bank(appellant in appeal No.423/09) to pay to the complainant (appellant in appeal No.598/09) amount of fixed deposit with interest total Rs.4,05,364/- with future interest @ 9% with effect from the date of filing of complaint and further to pay compensation of Rs.3000/- for causing mental agony and Rs.2000/- more towards cost of the proceedings. (For the sake of brevity appellant in appeal No.423/09 is herein after referred as opponent bank and appellant in appeal No.598/09 as complainant) 2. As both these appeals arises out of the same judgment and order we have decided to dispose of them by this common judgment. 3. The brief facts giving rise to these appeals are that :- According to complainant on 3.3.2009 he had deposited amount of Rs.4 lakhs with the opponent bank...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 21 2014 (TRI)

The Manager, Idbi Bank Ltd. Vs. Anil Shankar Pund

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

S.M. Shembole, Presiding Judicial Member: 1. Challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated 21.8.2008 passed by District Consumer Forum Aurangabad allowing consumer complaint No.339/2007 directing appellant/opponent bank to pay to the complainant balance amount of loan and further compensation of Rs.2500/- etc. (For the sake of brevity appellant is hereinafter referred as opponent bank and respondent as complainant) 2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that:- In the month of August 2005, on application of complainant Shri.Anil Pund, opponent bank granted housing loan of Rs.6 lakhs to him. Loan amount of Rs.2,88,860/- was granted for purchasing plot and Rs.3,25,000/- for construction. As per the agreement opponent bank paid to the complainant amount of Rs.2,88,860/- and complainant purchased the plot and started work of construction. Thereafter opponent bank paid to the complainant amount of Rs.2,43,500/- but thereafter did not pay the balance amount of loan. Ther...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 21 2014 (TRI)

Agricultural Commissioner Vs. Hajra Ajij Shaikh and Others

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

S.M. Shembole, Presiding Judicial Member: 1. Challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated 14.8.2009 passed by District Consumer Forum Aurangabad allowing consumer complaint No.364/08 directing appellant/opponent No.3 to pay to the complainant amount of insurance. (For the sake of brevity appellant is hereinafter referred as opponent No.3 Agriculture Commissioner and respondent No.1 as the complainant and other respondent No.2 and 3 as opponent No.1 National Insurance company and opponent No.2 Kabal Insurance services) 2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that:- Late Shaikh Aziz Shaikh Dadamiya who was the husband of complainant Smt.Hazira was agriculturist having agriculture field Gut No.31/02 of village Alipur, Tq.Paithan, Dist.Aurangabad. The Government of Maharashtra had obtained farmers personal accidental death policy for the farmers covering risk of Rs.1 lakh each. It was obtained from opponent No.1 National Insurance Company for the period from 15.7.2006...

Tag this Judgment!


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