Supreme Court of India Judgements

46790 Judgements hosted as on 02/06/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Consumer

Consumer

Developers sell dreams to home buyers. Implicit in their representations is that the facilities which will be developed will provide convenience of living and a certain lifestyle. Developer who has breached a clear representation, is accountable to the process of law. The flat buyers are entitled to compensation for delayed handing over of possession and for the failure of the developer to fulfil the representations made to flat buyers in regard to the provision of amenities. Order of NCDRC set aside as patently erroneous. Appeal allowed.

Aug 24, 2020 sclaw

Developers sell dreams to home buyers. Implicit in their representations is that the facilities which will be developed by the developer will provide convenience of living and a certain lifestyle…

Consumer

Consumer Law–Negligence–Meaning of–Negligence is the breach of a duty caused by omission to do something which a reasonable man guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do–Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  

Aug 23, 2020 sclaw

2009(3) LAW HERALD (SC) 1640 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice  Dalveer Bhandari The Hon’ble Mr. Justice  Harjit Singh Bedi Civil Appeal No. 6168 of…

Consumer

HELD A hospital which renders free services to a certain category of patients, while providing services which are charged to the bulk of others would not lie outside the purview of the consumer fora. Indian Medical Association v V P Shantha 1995 SCC (6) 651 followed. SCOI left open the issue as to whether Safdarjung Hospital would be governed by the provisions of the Act as contained in Section 2(1)(o) (Service).

Aug 1, 2020 sclaw

The Supreme Court has observed that it is only where a hospital provides medical services free of charge across the board to all patients that it would stand outside the…

Consumer

IN RE : PROBLEMS AND MISERIES OF MIGRANT LABOURERS HELD No fare either by train or by bus shall be charged from any migrant workers – Railway fare shall be shared by the States as per their arrangement as submitted by the learned Solicitor General and in no case any fare should be asked or charged from any migrant workers by the States and the Railways & other interim directions issued.

May 30, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH IN RE : PROBLEMS AND MISERIES OF MIGRANT LABOURERS ( Before : Ashok Bhushan, Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.R. Shah, JJ. ) (IA…

Consumer

“Transit Marine Insurance Policy” HELD While construing a contract of insurance, it is not permissible for a court to substitute the terms of the contract. The court should always interpret the words used in a contract in a manner that will best express the intention of the parties. The NCDRC has incorrectly proceeded on the path that the ordinary course of transit would include assembling of the helicopter at New Delhi and the policy covered all risks till the time the helicopter did not reach Bhopal.

Apr 26, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Sections 2(d) and 2(1)(d) – Registered workers – Beneficiaries of service – Whether a construction worker who is registered under the Building and Other Construction Workers’ (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 and is a beneficiary of the Scheme made under the Rules framed pursuant to the enactment, is a ‘consumer’ HELD YES a ‘consumer’ includes not only   a person who has hired or availed of service but even a beneficiary of a service. The registered workers are clearly beneficiaries of the service provided by the Board in a statutory capacity –

Mar 17, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND REGISTERING OFFICER AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. KESAR LAL — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, – Section 13(2)(a) – Whether Section 13(2)(a), which provides for the respondent/opposite party filing its response to the complaint within 30 days or such extended period, not exceeding 15 days, should be read as mandatory or directory – District Forum has no power to extend the time for filing the response to the complaint beyond the period of 15 days in addition to 30 days as is envisaged under Section 13 of the Act.

Mar 8, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONSTITUTION BENCH NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. HILLI MULTIPURPOSE COLD STORAGE PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra, Indira Banerjee, Vineet…

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 2(d) – Meaning of “Consumer” – Destruction of some part of the crop – Respondent lodged a consumer complaint alleging negligence and breach of contract on the part of the Appellant on the ground that the Appellant failed to buy back her produce, leading to the destruction of the greater part of the crop – Appellant contested the farmers’ claims before consumer fora on the preliminary point of maintainability right up to this Court, HELD Tendency to resist even the smallest of claims on any ground possible, by exploiting the relatively greater capacity of seed companies to litigate for long periods of time, amounts to little more than harassment of agriculturists, Appeal dismissed

Mar 7, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S NANDAN BIOMATRIX LIMITED — Appellant Vs. S. AMBIKA DEVI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and R. Subhash Reddy,…

You missed

Cr P C

Prosecution can produce inadvertently omitted documents with court permission as Section 173(5) CrPC is directory, authenticity issues are for trial.

Jun 2, 2025 sclaw
Environment

Penal liability under Section 26 NGT Act for non-compliance requires proof of responsibility and power over the prohibited act, absent which penalty on individuals like the Mayor is unsustainable.

Jun 2, 2025 sclaw
C P C

A plaint cannot be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC where triable issues of title and validity of sale deeds based on revoked authority and unregistered documents exist, or where multiple causes of action allow for survival of other reliefs.

Jun 1, 2025 sclaw
State Laws

Nagaland Village and Area Councils Act, 1978 — Section 3 — Recognition of villages — State’s duty to consider objections fairly — Failure appears to have occurred in present case — Objections by appellant regarding ancestral land ownership not adequately considered by State authorities before recommending recognition — Court cannot definitively decide complex factual disputes regarding land ownership and customary practices — Appropriate for State authorities to resolve such issues.

Jun 1, 2025 sclaw