LawMirror.com

Results of 2

Andriod Application iphone Application

Showing : 5601-5610 of 8312 Results

BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2004
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 18, Rule 2 -- Some of the defendants when supporting plaintiff - Sequence of leading evidence should be - (1) Those defendants who fully support the case of plaintiff; (2) Those defendants who partly support the case of plaintiff and (3) Those defendants who do not support the case of the plaintiff in any part...........

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2004
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 13, Rule 1, 2 -- Documentary evidence - Admission in evidence - Plaintiff has denied its execution - Refusal to give exhibit mark by trial Court - Proper - However, as per experts opinion, signature on document tallied with admitted signature of plaintiff - If document properly stamped - Not required to be registered - Mode of Proof - Only..........

TAMIL NADU CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MADRAS

Year of decision: 2004
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g), 3 -- Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, Section 15 r/w Section 13 - Jurisdictional bar - Goods booked by Railway for delivery not delivered at all - Complaint claiming the value of goods alleging deficiency in service - Held that Section 15 r/w Section 13 of the 1987 Act operates to exclude the jurisdiction of all Courts and..........

MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MUMBAI

Year of decision: 2004
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1),(g), Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 89 -- Banking service - Honouring of tempered cheque - Money withdrawn from the complainant's account by fake cheque - Tamperings were done on the cheque which were so apparently visible even with the naked eyes - It was duty of the bank to be careful in allowing negotiation of the..........

UTTARANCHAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DEHRADUN

Year of decision: 2004
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1),(b) -- Complainant - Beneficiary of the goods or services - Though he has not bought or purchased or hired the services, availing the same with the approval of the person who has actually brought or hired the same, is covered by the definition of word complainant and can file the complaint...........

MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MUMBAI

Year of decision: 2004
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1),(g),13,14(1),(d) -- Lift faulty - Compensation - Fault in installation of the Lift - Complainant's wife fell down and suffered injuries due to the door of the lift remained open - Complainant's claim neither challenged nor controverted and supported by contemporaneous evidence - Deficiency in service proved - Rs 5,50,000/-..........

PONDICHERRY CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PONDICHERRY

Year of decision: 2004
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(d)(ii) -- Consumer - Commercial purpose - Computer - Manufacturing defects - During Warranty period - Plea that the complainant purchased the computer for business purpose hence not consumer repelled - Held that purchaser is consumer under Section 2(1)(d)(ii) in respect of services rendered or to be rendered by the seller, even..........

MADHYA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

Year of decision: 2004
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1),(g), Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 185 -- Insurance claim - Repudiation - Ground that the accidental loss or damage was caused to the bus whilst the permitted driver of the bus was under the influence of intoxicating liquor - Held that the claim of the respondent-complainant clearly fell within the exclusion clause and..........

UTTARANCHAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DEHRADUN

Year of decision: 2004
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1),(g),14(1),(d) -- Electricity bill - Rebate - Delay of 4-1/2 years in giving rebate to the respondent-complainant - Held to be deficiency in service - Grant of compensation of Rs.4,000/- by the District Forum held justified...........

CHHATISGARH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, RAIPUR

Year of decision: 2004
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1),(g),14(1),(d) -- Refund delayed - Compensation - Share money from society refunded during the pendency of complaint after a period of more than one year - District Forum held rightly that there is deficiency in service and allowed interest @ 9% p.a...........

Showing : 5601-5610 of 8312 Results