Supreme Court of India Judgements

47095 Judgements hosted as on 19/04/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Consumer

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,…

Consumer

……..it is evident that the 1976 Rules prescribed that a licence had to be obtained for the purposes of storing Hexane of the quantity involved in the instant case, and the Appellant has failed to comply with this requirement………..In the absence of such a licence, the Appellant could not have lawfully stored Hexane…….Non disclosure…..Respondent was justified in repudiating the claim of the Appellant on this ground.

Feb 17, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S BASPA ORGANICS LIMITED — Appellant Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and R. Subhash Reddy,…

You missed

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
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
Service

Regularisation of contractual/ad hoc employees — Notifications dated 16.06.2014 and 18.06.2014, which sought to regularise the services of Group ‘B’, ‘C’, and ‘D’ employees were found to be valid as they aimed to provide benefits to employees left out from a previous regularisation policy and had clear criteria for eligibility such as working on sanctioned posts and possessing necessary qualifications.

Apr 19, 2026 sclaw
Environment Mining

Environmental Law and Wildlife Protection — Illegal Sand Mining — Supreme Court’s Suo Motu Cognizance — The Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of rampant illegal sand mining in the National Chambal Gharial Sanctuary, recognizing its severe impact on wildlife habitats, including endangered Gharials. The Court issued notices to concerned states and authorities, highlighting that such destruction of habitats violates environmental protection laws like the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

Apr 19, 2026 sclaw