This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register below.Existing Users Log InUsername or EmailPassword Remember Me Forgot password? Click here to resetNew User? Click here to register Post navigation Consumer Complaint – Deficiency of service or defect – Adverse reaction due to administration of vaccine Engerix-B – Non-mentioning of myositis being suffered as an adverse reaction in the literature accompanying the injection or on the vial not amounts to deficiency of service, more particularly when the adverse reaction was minimal only to the extent of 0.02 in one million – If the matter is looked at from its correct perspective it is seen that except for the appellant assuming that he has suffered myositis and the cause for the same was the Engerix-B vaccine being administered, the same has not been established with the minimal required evidence to conclude even on preponderance of probability – Complaint dismissed Consumer Law – Policy – Supreme Court held that the date of issuance of the policy would be the relevant date for all the purposes and not the date of proposal or the date of issuance of the receipt – The appeals were accordingly allowed and the orders passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission were set aside.