Showing : 3651-3660 of 8601 Results

H.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHIMLA
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g)-- Additional evidence - Appellate stage - Material on the file enough for adjudicating upon the controversy between the parties - At the belated stage no case made out for allowing additional evidence and condition precedent for allowing application for additional evidence not made out...........
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(d), 2(1)(e)-- Consumer - Consumer dispute - Provident accumulation - Withholding of - In backdrop of the scheme which required employer Bank to contribute to the Provident Fund, services rendered by employer has to be considered 'service' within the meaning of section 2(1)(o) and the employee to be a 'consumer'..........
H.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHIMLA
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)-- Insurance claim - Allegation by appellant - OP's that reasonable opportunity of hearing not afforded by the District Forum - Record showed that numerous opportunities allowed by the District Forum to OP for filing evidence including subject to payment of cost - District Forum below have been more..........
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)-- Provident accumulation - Withholding of - Provident Fund accumulation of respondent cannot be withheld by employer Bank against loan raised by her against various Cooperative Societies - In case the loan raised by her remained unliquidated, it was open to Cooperative Societies to initiate recovery..........
HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANCHKULA
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(d)-- Consumer - Residential plot - Application for - Allotment of a residential plot has yet not been made to the complainant and the application of the complainant is/was under process for completion of the necessary formalities by the complainant and approval of the authorities, on the date when the..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Education-- Admission - The petitioner was ineligible at the time of admission to the course - The petitioner not entitled to any indulgence from the Court merely on the ground that she was admitted by respondent and has been allowed to study the course - Petition liable to be dismissed and held that the..........
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Swimming pool-- Deficiency in service - Compensation - In case of accidental death of a legal professional aged 43 years - Deceased was not a learner swimmer - It has not been established in what manner the deceased sustained injury on his head - Having regard to circumstances it can only be presumed that..........
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g)-- Plot allotment - Alternative plot - Price - Estoppel - Pleadings - Original allottee had in categorical terms stated that residential plot was acceptable to him on enhanced rate and he had himself deposited the additional amount - The issue could not be reopened by the respondent - complainant -..........
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)-- National Saving Certificate - Issued in favour of HUF in contravention of Rule 4 of the Rules - Savings bank interest already been paid to the complainant - Orders of the Fora below allowing the complaint of respondent liable to be set aside...........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g) , 14(1)(d), Carriage by Air Act, 1972, Section 4, Rule 5 , 6 , 10 , 11, Contract Act, 1872, Section 186 , 187 , 188 , 237-- Air carriage - Deficiency in service - Dismissal of complaint on the ground that complainant - appellant has no privity of contract with respondent no. 1 air carrier - For and on behalf of respondent No.1, respondent No. 3 had an express authority to receive the cargo and on account of that..........

Showing : 3651-3660 of 8601 Results