Consumer Protection Act

Supreme Court Clarifies ‘Flood and Inundation’ in Insurance Policy: Oriental Insurance vs. J.K. Cement (28 January 2020)

/ Consumer Law, Consumer Protection Act, Flood and Inundation Clause, Insurance Act, 1938, Insurance Act, 1938 with Section 64-UM, Insurance Law, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), R. Subhash Reddy, Standard Fire and Special Perils Insurance Policy

Supreme Court Clarifies ‘Flood and Inundation’ in Insurance Policy: Oriental Insurance vs. J.K. Cement (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of ‘flood’ and ‘inundation’ in insurance policies. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: Oriental Insurance Company Limited vs. M/s. J.K. Cement Works Judgment Date: 28 January 2020 Date of the Judgment: 28 January 2020 Citation: [Not Provided […]

Supreme Court Clarifies ‘Flood and Inundation’ in Insurance Policy: Oriental Insurance vs. J.K. Cement (28 January 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Holds Bank Liable for Unauthorized Net Banking Transfer: DAV Public School vs. Indian Bank (2019)

/ Banking Law, Consumer Protection Act, Consumer Protection Act with, Deficiency of Service, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Hrishikesh Roy, Internet Banking, Judges, Unauthorized Transactions

Supreme Court Holds Bank Liable for Unauthorized Net Banking Transfer: DAV Public School vs. Indian Bank (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a bank is liable for unauthorized online transfers when it links a customer’s account to internet banking without their request. CASE TYPE: Consumer Case Name: DAV Public School vs. The Senior Manager, Indian Bank, Midnapur

Supreme Court Holds Bank Liable for Unauthorized Net Banking Transfer: DAV Public School vs. Indian Bank (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies hotel liability for valet parking theft in consumer cases: Taj Mahal Hotel vs. United India Insurance (2019)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Bailment, Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Consumer Law, Deficiency in Service, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 148, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 151, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court Clarifies Hotel Liability for Valet Parking Theft: Taj Mahal Hotel vs. United India Insurance (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the extent of liability of hotels for theft of vehicles under valet parking. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: Taj Mahal Hotel vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 14 November 2019

Supreme Court clarifies hotel liability for valet parking theft in consumer cases: Taj Mahal Hotel vs. United India Insurance (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Cost Escalation in Housing Project: Visakhapatnam Metropolitan Region Development Authority vs. Chavva Sheela Reddy (2019)

/ Consumer Dispute, Consumer Protection Act, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 7, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Rights of Allottees, Terms of Contract

Supreme Court Allows Cost Escalation in Housing Project: Visakhapatnam Metropolitan Region Development Authority vs. Chavva Sheela Reddy (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a development authority can demand an escalated cost for a flat when the initial allotment was at a fixed price. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: Visakhapatnam Metropolitan Region Development Authority vs. Chavva Sheela

Supreme Court Allows Cost Escalation in Housing Project: Visakhapatnam Metropolitan Region Development Authority vs. Chavva Sheela Reddy (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds No Medical Negligence in Patient’s Death: Vinod Jain vs. Santokba Durlabhji Memorial Hospital (2019)

/ Consumer Law, Consumer Protection Act, Duty of Care, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Medical Law, Medical Negligence, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Upholds No Medical Negligence in Patient’s Death: Vinod Jain vs. Santokba Durlabhji Memorial Hospital (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the hospital and doctor were negligent in the treatment of the patient, leading to her death. CASE TYPE: Consumer Case Name: Vinod Jain vs. Santokba Durlabhji Memorial Hospital & Anr. Judgment Date: 25 February 2019

Supreme Court Upholds No Medical Negligence in Patient’s Death: Vinod Jain vs. Santokba Durlabhji Memorial Hospital (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Remands Consumer Case Due to Lack of Notice: Mangalam Homes & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. vs. Joy Kaliyavumkal (2018)

/ Civil Procedure, Consumer Dispute Redressal, Consumer Protection Act, Deepak Gupta, Judges, Madan B. Lokur, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Notice Requirements, Procedural Fairness, Right to be Heard

Supreme Court Remands Consumer Case Due to Lack of Notice: Mangalam Homes & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. vs. Joy Kaliyavumkal (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) can proceed ex-parte without ensuring proper notice to the parties. CASE TYPE: Consumer Dispute Case Name: M/s Mangalam Homes & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Supreme Court Remands Consumer Case Due to Lack of Notice: Mangalam Homes & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. vs. Joy Kaliyavumkal (2018) Read Post »

Scroll to Top