Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: maharashtra state consumer disputes redressal commission scdrc aurangabad Page 6 of about 120 results (0.208 seconds)

Feb 20 2014 (TRI)

The Manager,idbi Bank Ltd. Vs. Jeevan Parasram Raundal

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 4.8.2008 passed by District Consumer Forum Aurangabad allowing consumer complaint No.172/2007 directing appellants/opponent No.1 bank to pay to the complainant balance loan amount of Rs.1,92,000/- with 9% interest with effect from 13.4.2007 and further compensation of Rs.10,000/- causing mental agony and Rs.1000/- towards cost of the proceedings. (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 March 2007 complainant had proposed to purchase the flat from Pratik Villa Apartment situated at N-4 Cidco,Aurangabad. Therefore he approached to opponent bank for loan and opponent bank by its letter dated 4.4.2007 sanctioned loan of Rs.4,80,000/-. It was agreed by the complainant to repay loan amount with interest @ 10.25% p.a. with monthly instalment of Rs.49...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 20 2014 (TRI)

Deepak Shivchand Ladda and Another Vs. SachIn Suganchandji Chitalangi

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 31.1.2008 passed by District Consumer Forum Aurangabad partly allowing consumer complaint No.278/07 directing appellants/opponents to repay amount of Rs.1,30,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. to the complainant/respondent and further to pay Rs.300/- towards costs of the proceedings. (For the sake of brevity appellants are herein after referred as opponents and respondent as complainant) 2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that:- "Opponents No.1 and 2 are running the business of catering. On 19.2.2006 marriage of complainant's sister was to be celebrated. Therefore the complainant approached opponents and gave contract of catering for supply of food on 18.2.2006 and 19.2.2006. Opponents agreed to supply food for Rs.2,60,000/- and on 27.1.2006 by giving estimate received amount of Rs.1,30,000/- as advance. However, about 10-12 days prior to the date of marriage of complaina...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2014 (TRI)

The Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ashok Gupta, Partn ...

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

Uma Bora, Member: 1. National Insurance Company Limited through its Branch Manager preferred this appeal against the judgment and order passed by District Forum, Jalgaon on 05.04.2008 while deciding complaint case No. 997/2007. 2. Facts giving rise to this appeal are as under: Complainant Shri. Ashok Gupta is partner of M/s. J.K. Dalmil situated at Jalgaon. Said company used to import grains and to secure said import complainant had obtained policy bearing No.270607/420/202/97 on 12.02.1998 from the appellant. Complainant took insurance of 100 M.Tons of Toor whole for value of USD 32,500 + 10% was equal to Indian Rs.13,94,055/-. Out of 100 MT of Toor whole complainant received 50 MT of Toor whole at Jalgaon and remaining 50 MT of Toor was to arrive from Yangon by ship M.V. Jaipur. Said goods were sent by vehicles Machinery and Equipment Trading Yangaon Myanmar to Mahesh and Company Pvt. Ltd., Singapure who in turn consigned the same to the complainant vide shipment advice dated 22.04.1...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2014 (TRI)

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co.Ltd. and Another Vs. San ...

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 15.9.2008 passed by District Consumer Forum Osmanabad allowing consumer complaint No.177/2008 directing appellant/opponent to pay to the complainant damages/compensation at Rs.1,19,000/- and Rs.500/- more towards cost of the proceedings. (For the sake of brevity appellant are hereinafter referred as opponents and respondent as complainant) 2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that:- Complainant Sanjay Deshmukh is owner of field Gut No.83/2 admeasuring 4hector-72R of village Pethsavangi, Tq.Umerga, Dist.Osmanabad. It is an irrigated land (Bagayat land). He is a consumer of opponents and having electric connection to his electric motor which is installed on the well in his field. 3. In the year 2005-06 complainant had grown sugarcane in his field admeasuring 1 Hector 40R. On 7.4.2007 in the noon due to friction of electric wires passing through his field and sugarcane wh...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2014 (TRI)

Mantri Builders and Others Vs. Uday Narayanrao Kulkarni and Others

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

Uma S. Bora, Member: 1. Appellant Mantri Builders through its proprietor Kiran Laxminarayan Mantri resident of Latur challenges in this appeal the judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum, Osmanabad on 15.12.2007 while deciding consumer complaint No.119/2007. Appellant in appeal No.150/2008 is the original complainant preferred appeal for enhancement of compensation granted by District Consumer Forum Osmanabad in C.C.No.119/2007. 2. Both these appeals are arising out of common judgment and order and therefore we are deciding both these appeals by the common judgment and order. 3. The facts giving rise to both these appeals are as under. Complainant Uday Narayan Kulkarni resident of Latur had approached to Mantri Builders for purchasing plot and construction of the house on the said plot. Complainant was required to avail the loan therefore he approached to Barpute Consultant Services, Latur and accordingly got the loan of Rs.3,50,000/- from opponent No.3 ICICI Home Finance ...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2014 (TRI)

Dilip Vs. the Branch Manager, Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. and ...

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 31.10.2008 passed by District Consumer Forum, Beed dismissing consumer complaint No.26/2008 (for the sake of brevity the appellant is hereinafter referred as œcomplainant? and respondents as œopponents?). 2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that, complainant Dilip Kadam was the owner of Tata Indica car bearing registration No.MH.23-C-1201. It was purchased on 30.06.2006 by obtaining loan from opponent No.2. Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Limited. At the same time the vehicle was insured with opponent No.1 ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company. It was insured as a private car. However the vehicle was used as a passenger carrying vehicle by obtaining national permit. 3. On 31.03.2007 while the vehicle was going from Ahmednagar to Beed, it met with an accident and it was damaged. One of the passengers also died by sustaining injuries. Immediately afte...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 2014 (TRI)

United India Insurance Company Ltd. Through Its Divisional Manager Vs. ...

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

Uma Bora, Presiding Member: 1. United India Insurance Company Ltd through its Divisional Manager, Aurangabad challenges in this appeal the judgment and order passed by the Dist. Consumer Forum, Aurangabad on 31/07/2013 partly allowing the consumer complaint No. 432/2012. 2. Facts in nutshell are as under : Complainant Bhavrao Maroti Gavande had filed the complaint claiming the amount for sustaining permanent disability but during the pendency of complaint he died on 31/03/2012. Therefore complaint was proceeded with legal heirs of the original complainant. Legal heirs are as under: a. Lilabai Bhavrao Gavande b. Sanjay Bhavrao Gavande c. Balu Bhavrao Gavande Deceased Bhavrao had obtained Farmer Personal Accident Policy through State Government. Said policy was for the period 15/08/2009 to 14/08/2010. On 30/12/2009 deceased was proceeding to his house, at that time one Ape Rikshaw dashed him from back side and Bhavrao was seriously injured in the said accident. He was admitted in the hos...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 2014 (TRI)

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Divisional Officer Vs. Kantab ...

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

K.B. Gawali, Member: 1. This appeal is preferred by original opponent No.2 against the judgment and order dated 17.08.2013 passed by District Consumer Forum Beed in C.C.No.153/2012 whereby the complaint is partly allowed holding the appellant as liable for deficiency in service. For the better understanding appellant hereinafter is termed as "opponent insurance company" whereas respondent No.1 hereinafter termed as "complainant", the respondent No.2 which is appointed by Government herein after termed as "opponent insurance agency" and respondent No.3 as hereinafter termed as "opponent Collector". 2. It is the case of complainant that her husband namely Baliram Gitaram Gaware who was farmer was died on 11.10.2010 due to falling branch of tree on him while working in his agriculture land caused by storm associated with heavy rain. She contended that Government of Maharashtra had obtained insurance policy for the farmers in the State of Maharashtra and her husband being farmer was benefi...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 2014 (TRI)

The Maharashtra State Co.Op.Housing Finance Corporation and Others Vs. ...

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 28.7.2008 passed by District Consumer Forum Aurangabad allowing C.C.No.147/07 directing appellant/org. opponent No.1 and 2 to hand over the possession of flat No.A-7 from Shantganga Apartment, Aurangabad. Further appellant/opponent No.1 and 2 are directed to pay to respondent/complainant compensation of Rs.25,000/- for causing mental torture of Rs.2500/- more towards cost of the proceedings. (For the sake of brevity appellants are hereinafter referred as opponents and respondent No.1 as complainant whereas respondent No.3 who is appellant in appeal No.494/2011 is called as purchaser) 2. As both these appeals are arising out of the same judgment and order and parties are same we have decided to dispose of these appeals by this common judgment. 3. The brief facts giving rise to these appeals are that:- Complainant Smt.Rashmi Jariwala was the owner of flat bearing No.7 from Shantga...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 2014 (TRI)

Avadesh Inderchand Sanklecha and Another Vs. Chirantan Aarogya Seva Va ...

Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad

K.B. Gawali, Member: 1. This appeal is filed by the original complainant against the impugned judgment and order dtd. 31/01/2008 passed by the Dist.Consumer Forum Dhule in CC.No.359/2007 whereby the complaint is dismissed. The respondents are the original opponent Nos. 1 to 5.For better understanding the appellants are hereinafter termed as the complainant. The respondent No. 1 is the hospital and respondent Nos. 2 to 5 are the doctors working in the said hospital. All these respondent Nos. 1 to 5 are herein after collectively termed as the œOriginal opponent?. 2. Brief facts alleging to the present appeal are as under :- That, the complainants had admitted their newly born male baby for treatment with the opponent hospital on 20/10/2006. The said baby was born on 17/10/2006 in the hospital of Dr. Girish Mundada. It was submitted that the said babys birth was premature and his weight was also low as compared to the standard weight. That, the baby was also affected by Jaundice and...

Tag this Judgment!


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