LawMirror.com

Results of op

Andriod Application iphone Application

Showing : 121-130 of 1236 Results

WEST BENGAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOLKATA

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(d) -- Consumer - Commercial purpose - Purchase of Hydraulic Backhoe Loader machine by complainant - Plea by OP that complainant not a consumer and is a big businessman and doing business for earning profit - Transaction entered into between the complainant in his proprietorship capacity - Though complainant has not averred this..........

WEST BENGAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOLKATA

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(f), 2(1)(g), 14(1)(d) -- Manufacturing defect - Purchase of Hydraulic Backhoe Loader machine by complainant - Various reports of the inspections conducted on behalf of the OPs clearly indicate that the machine in question was suffering from numerous defects from the very inception and installation of the machine in question held..........

HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANCHKULA

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(f), 2(1)(g) -- Car - Manufacturing defect - Till the date the vehicle was last attended by the engineers of the OPs it had covered about 61000 kms as per the last job card maintained by the OPs - Had there been any manufacturing defect in the vehicle it could not have run 61,000 kms. - It cannot be said that there was any..........

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MADHYA PRADESH

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Medical negligence -- Breast cancer - Alleged incorrect treatment by OP doctor - The discharge card mentions that the OP doctor performed 'lumpectomy', which is also called excision biopsy - The papers of the Tata Memorial Hospital also mention that an excisional biopsy was done at Jabalpur - A lumpectomy/excision biopsy is performed to ascertain whether the patient has..........

MADHYA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Medical negligence -- Breast cancer - Alleged incorrect treatment by OP doctor - The discharge card mentions that the OP doctor performed 'lumpectomy', which is also called excision biopsy - The papers of the Tata Memorial Hospital also mention that an excisional biopsy was done at Jabalpur - A lumpectomy/excision biopsy is performed to ascertain whether the patient has..........

MADHYA PRADESH CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Medical negligence -- Breast cancer - Alleged incorrect treatment by OP doctor - The discharge card mentions that the OP doctor performed `lumpectomy', which is also called excision biopsy - The papers of the Tata Memorial Hospital also mention that an excisional biopsy was done at Jabalpur - A lumpectomy/excision biopsy is performed to ascertain whether the patient has..........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15 -- Appeal - Necessary party - Impleadment of nonparty/ third party - Appellant - OP impleaded non - party/ third party on the ground that such third party is also liable either partly or wholly, even though the complainant has not sought any relief against a third party - Complainant before the District Forum neither impleaded nor..........

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(d)(ii) -- Consumer - Medical service - Contention by OP I that medical services given by him were without any consideration and free of charge as such complainant cannot be regarded as consumers of the answering OP within meaning of Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of CP Act - Complaint claimed that at the time of admission of patient a sum..........

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(d)(ii) -- Consumer - Medical service - Contention by OP I that medical services given by him were without any consideration and free of charge as such complainant cannot be regarded as consumers of the answering OP within meaning of Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of CP Act - Complaint claimed that at the time of admission of patient a sum..........

NATIONAL DELHI CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g), 21(b) -- Revisional jurisdiction - Concurrent findings - Mediclaim policy - Suppression of previous illness - Renewal with an enhancement in the cover from Rs.1,50,000/- to 3,00,000/- The Insurance Company - OP has already settled the claim of the petitioner to the extent of Rs.1,50,000 covered by the mediclaim policy before..........

Showing : 121-130 of 1236 Results