Showing : 1-10 of 55 Results

NATIONAL DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
Year of decision: 2012
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(d), 2(1)(g), 17(2)-- Territorial jurisdiction - Once the State Commission rightly or wrongly came to the conclusion that it had no territorial jurisdiction, it ought to have laid its hands off the complaint and returned it to the complainant for presentation before the appropriate Consumer Forum/Tribunal - Dismissal..........
PUNJAB CHANDIGARH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 11(2)(c)-- Territorial jurisdiction - Cause of action - Insured claim - The insured car met with accident in District Ferozepur, as such cause of action accrued in District Forum, Ferozepur was having the territorial jurisdiction to try and decide the complaint as per provisions of Section 11(2)(c) of the CP..........
H.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHIMLA
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 11(2)-- Territorial jurisdiction - Education - Coaching Institute - Appellant carrying on coaching Institute at Chandigarh - They are also residing there and there is no branch office within the jurisdiction of the District Forum Hamirpur - Even no cause of action wholly or in part has arisen with the..........
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 11(2)-- Territorial jurisdiction - Insurance claim - Policy in question was issued by OP - 1/respondent No. 1 from New Delhi - The husband of the complainant No. 1 was working in a firm in Mohali and died at Amritsar - Finding by the District Forum that no cause of action arose at Chandigarh and it has no..........
UNION TERRITORY STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 11(2)-- Territorial jurisdiction - Insurance claim - Policy in question was issued by OP - 1/respondent No. 1 from New Delhi - The husband of the complainant No. 1 was working in a firm in Mohali and died at Amritsar - Finding by the District Forum that no cause of action arose at Chandigarh and it has no..........
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 11(2)-- Territorial jurisdiction - Housing - Flat in the jurisdiction of Mohali District Forum - Plea that complaint before the District Forum, Chandigarh not maintainable repelled because the OPs have their head office at Chandigarh - Thus as per Section 11(2) (a) of the CP Act, 1986, the Consumer Fora,..........
UNION TERRITORY STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 11(2)-- Territorial jurisdiction - Housing - Flat in the jurisdiction of Mohali District Forum - Plea that complaint before the District Forum, Chandigarh not maintainable repelled because the OPs have their head office at Chandigarh - Thus as per Section 11(2) (a) of the CP Act, 1986, the Consumer Fora,..........
PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 11(2)-- Territorial jurisdiction - Medical negligence - No deficiency in service alleged against respondent No. 3 who only conducted the MRI as well as some other tests of the deceased and recommended the patient for checkup from a Super Specialty hospital of Neurosurgery as he has failed to diagnose the..........
DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 11-- Territorial jurisdiction - Plea that the dispute falls within the territorial jurisdiction of District Forum X whereas respondent - complainant has chosen to file the complaint before District Forum No. VI repelled - Order of the District Forum dismissing application by observing that entire Delhi..........
UTTARAKHAND STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DEHRADUN
Year of decision: 2010
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 11(2)-- Territorial jurisdiction - Clearly stated in the written statement by appellant/OP that its employee accompanied the machine to the factory premises of the complainant at Dehradun, where it was delivered and intended to be installed - District Forum Dehradun rightly repelled the contention of lack..........

Showing : 1-10 of 55 Results