Supreme Court of India Judgements

47200 Judgements hosted as on 30/04/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Consumer

Consumer Insurance Law

Insurance Law — Fire Insurance Claim — Assessment of Loss — Survey Report — Admissibility and Weightage — Admissibility of Survey Report as Primary Evidence — In insurance claims, a survey report, prepared by an expert after physical inspection, is considered primary and significant evidence — It cannot be disregarded without strong contrary evidence showing arbitrariness or unreasonableness.

Apr 19, 2026 sclaw

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION   M/S. A.P. KNITWEARS Vs. SBI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : A.P. Sahi, President and Bharatkumar Pandya, Member ) First Appeal…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Section 2(1)(d) — Consumer — A person purchasing a vehicle for business to earn livelihood is a consumer. — Deficiency in service — No deficiency in service if a vehicle model is not available and another available model is given to the buyer as per mutual understanding and agreement, and the buyer fails to make payments for the second vehicle.

Apr 19, 2026 sclaw

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION   PROGRESSIVE AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. BHAJAN DEBNATH ( Before : Inder Jit Singh, Presiding Member and Sudhir Kumar Jain, Member ) Second…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Banking — Cheque Presentation — Bank’s failure to re-present cheques within their validity period after they were returned due to a bank strike constitutes negligence and a deficiency in service, as banks have a duty of due diligence in handling customer deposits.Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Deficiency in Service — Banking — Cheque Presentation — Bank’s failure to re-present cheques within their validity period after they were returned due to a bank strike constitutes negligence and a deficiency in service, as banks have a duty of due diligence in handling customer deposits.

Apr 16, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 363 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CANARA BANK Vs. KAVITA CHOWDHARY ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 2587 of 2025…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(g) — Deficiency in service — Manufacturing defect — Vehicle purchased with manufacturing defect — State Commission awarded refund of purchase price and compensation — High Court modified the order, directing refund of the principal amount without interest or compensation, citing the complainant’s refusal to accept a replacement engine — Appeal partly allowed

Apr 14, 2026 sclaw

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION   NISSAN MOTOR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. JAISON LUKOSE AND OTHERS ( Before : A. P. Sahi, President and Bharatkumar Pandya, Member ) First Appeal…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 21, 22 — Medical Negligence — Burden of Proof — Complainant failed to discharge the burden of proving medical negligence by leading cogent and convincing evidence — Mere assertions or affidavits are insufficient — Dismissed

Apr 14, 2026 sclaw

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION   AKTHAR KHAN Vs. GOYAL’S MEDICAL CENTRE AND OTHERS ( Before : Inder Jit Singh, Presiding Member and Sudhir Kumar Jain, Member ) Consumer Complaint…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 2(1)(d)(ii) — Definition of “Consumer” — Commercial Purpose — Bank Guarantees availed for the purpose of facilitating profit generation in a business transaction are not considered to be for a commercial purpose that excludes them from the definition of a consumer under the Act, especially when the dispute concerns the refund of commission for unutilized periods of such guarantees — The dominant purpose test applies, and the specific nature of the dispute regarding service charges makes the complaint maintainable — The interpretation of “commercial purpose” should not exclude disputes related to service charges for financial facilities.

Apr 14, 2026 sclaw

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION   CANARA BANK Vs. M/S. OASYS CYBERNETICS PVT. LTD. ( Before : A.P. Sahi, President and Bharatkumar Pandya, Member ) NC/FA/712/2012 Decided on : 25-02-2026…

Consumer

Housing Finance — Loan Disbursement — Due Diligence — The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission emphasized that while a housing finance company (HFC) has a duty to exercise due diligence, borrowers also have a responsibility to exercise reasonable care and circumspection when availing home loans, especially in builder-linked projects with potential delays or issues — The Commission found that the borrowers had already booked their flats and made initial payments before approaching the HFC for loans, negating claims of reliance on alleged assurances from the HFC — The HFC disbursed loans based on the borrowers’ proposals and submitted records, and could not be held liable for the developer’s subsequent defaults.

Apr 14, 2026 sclaw

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION   SUBASH CHANDRA SEN Vs. HDFC LTD. ( Before : Avm Jonnalagadda Rajendra Avsm Vsm (Retd.), Presiding Member and Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, Member ) First…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 12, 21(b) — Medical Negligence — Injury to Common Bile Duct (CBD) during gall bladder surgery — Liability of doctors — Lower forums found Opposite Parties 1 & 2 liable for medical negligence and deficiency in service — National Commission upheld these findings — Revision petitions by Opposite Parties 1 & 2 dismissed — Revision petition by complainants allowed for enhancement of compensation — Opposite Parties 1 & 2 jointly and severally liable to pay enhanced compensation and confirmed medical expenses and litigation costs — Appeals dismissed in part and allowed in part.

Apr 14, 2026 sclaw

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION   DR. VIVEK K. JAIN, VIVEK JAIN HOSPITAL AND OTHERS Vs. LAKHWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS ( Before : Inderjit Singh Presiding Member and Sudhir Kumar…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 498A — Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband — For the conviction under Section 498A, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused mental or physical cruelty to the woman. In this case, the evidence presented by the prosecution regarding dowry demands and cruelty was found to be contradictory and uncorroborated by independent witnesses. Therefore, the conviction of the appellant under Section 498A IPC was set aside.

May 1, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 89 — Compromise Decree — Interpretation of — Memorandum of Settlement (MOS) forming basis of decree — Clause (xiii) specifying conditional obligations for exchange of immovable properties or payment of guideline value upon failure to transfer — Held, obligation to pay monetary compensation triggered by failure to transfer agreed ‘B Schedule’ land, not discretionary option.

May 1, 2026 sclaw
Education

Right to Education Act, 2009 — Section 12 — Uttar Pradesh Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011 — Rule 8 — Neighbourhood School Obligation — A neighbourhood school has a constitutional and statutory duty to admit students forwarded by the State Government without delay, as mandated by Article 21A of the Constitution and relevant provisions of the RTE Act and UP RTE Rules — The school cannot question the eligibility of a student once the government has completed the admission process and forwarded the list.

Apr 30, 2026 sclaw
I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 5(8) — Financial Debt — Corporate Guarantees — A liability arising from corporate guarantee for money borrowed against interest qualifies as financial debt — The execution of corporate guarantees, even if challenged on grounds of timing or non-disclosure, are considered valid and enforceable if their execution is admitted or demonstrably proven, making the appellants entitled to recognition as financial creditors.

Apr 30, 2026 sclaw