Supreme Court of India Judgements

46420 Judgements hosted as on 27/04/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Consumer

Consumer

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.

Jan 14, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. JAYA WADHWANI — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. )…

Consumer

Insurance Claim – Replacement of Car – On account of damage caused to BMW Car due to accident – In case of total loss/constructive total loss, instead of paying the amount, the insurer has an option available to replace the vehicle with a new one – Thus, it is not the right of the insured under the policy conditions to always claim replacement of the car – It is at the option of the insurer

Nov 25, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. — Appellant Vs. MUKUL AGGARWAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal,…

Consumer

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

Nov 1, 2023 sclaw

(2023) 11 SCALE 325 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRAKASH BANG — Appellant Vs. GLAXO SMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and Prashant…

Consumer Medical Negligence

Medical negligence – Adopting an alternative medical course of action would not amount to medical negligence – After the difficulties faced during the ‘Tracheostomy Tube’ (TT) decannulation process and the discovery of a stridor, opting for the ‘Nasotracheal Intubation’ (NI) procedure as an alternative course of treatment to aid respiration could be medically justified as well

Oct 24, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M.A BIVIJI — Appellant Vs. SUNITA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Manoj Misra and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 3975,…

Consumer

Medical Negligence – The standard to be applied for judging, whether the person charged has been negligent or not, would be that of an ordinary competent person exercising ordinary skill in that profession. It is not possible for every professional to possess the highest level of expertise or skills in that branch which he practices. A highly skilled professional may be possessed of better qualities, but that cannot be made the basis or the yardstick for judging the performance of the professional proceeded against on indictment of negligence.

Oct 22, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MRS. KALYANI RAJAN — Appellant Vs. INDRAPRASTHA APOLLO HOSPITAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Prashant Kumar Mishra and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. )…

Consumer

“Commercial Purpose” – Even purchases in certain situations for ‘commercial purposes’ would not take within its sweep the purchaser out of the definition of expression ‘consumer’ -if the commercial use is by the purchaser himself for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment, such purchaser of goods would continue to be a ‘consumer’.

Sep 23, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ROHIT CHAUDHARY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. M/S VIPUL LTD. — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar, JJ. ) Civil…

Consumer

HELD that the leak of ammonia gas was not occasioned due to wear and tear (as claimed by the Respondent) but was the outcome of an accident[1] which was not foreseen and beyond its control and not covered by any of the exceptions in the Refrigeration Policy (Exception Clause 3) so as to entitle the Respondent to claim immunity for the ultimate purpose of repudiating the insurance claim lodged by the Appellant – Payment of Rs. 2,25,00,000/- in full and final.

Aug 10, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH S.S. COLD STORAGE INDIA PVT. LTD. — Appellant Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and Dipankar Datta, JJ.…

You missed

Stamp Act State Laws

“Supreme Court Clarifies State’s Power to Levy Stamp Duty on Insurance Policies” Stamp Act, 1899 – Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act, 1952 – Power to levy and collect stamp duty – The primary issues are the legislative competence of the State to levy stamp duty on insurance policies and the applicability of the Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act, 1952 or the 1998 Act – LIC contends that the state lacks legislative competence to impose stamp duty on insurance policies and challenges the demand for stamp duty payment for policies issued using stamps purchased from Maharashtra – The State of Rajasthan argues that it has the power to collect stamp duty on insurance policies under Entry 44 of List III, as per the rate prescribed by the Parliament under Entry 91 of List I – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, upheld the High Court’s judgment, and affirmed the state’s power to levy stamp duty. However, it directed that the state shall not demand and collect the stamp duty as per the orders dated between 1993-94 and 2001-02 – The Court reasoned that the state has the legislative competence to impose and collect stamp duty on insurance policies, and the 1952 Act applies to the case – The Court analyzed the constitutional provisions and previous judgments to conclude that the state can impose stamp duty using rates prescribed by the Parliament – The Supreme Court concluded that while the state’s power to levy stamp duty is upheld, the specific demands for stamp duty payment in this case were set aside due to the circumstances presented.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
I P C

“Supreme Court Overturns Lower Courts, Orders Trial for Alleged Marriage Fraud and Conspiracy (IPC Sections 420 & 120-B)” Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 420 read with Section 120-B – The appellant challenged lower courts’ orders regarding the summoning of respondents for alleged dishonest inducement in a marriage – The appellant claimed he was deceived into marrying a married respondent and that all respondents conspired to induce him into marriage and leave him with a significant sum of money – The respondents argued that there was no concealment or cheating, as all facts were disclosed to the appellant from the beginning – The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the orders of the High Court and Sessions Court, and restored the Magistrate’s order for the respondents to face trial – The court found that a prima facie case was made out for issuing process against the respondents, and the lower courts’ approach was not legally sustainable – The court concluded that the respondents should face trial for the alleged offences, and the case will be decided on its merits based on the evidence presented by the parties.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Specific Relief Act

Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 6 – Suit by person dispossessed of immovable property – The appellants, owner of the property, allegedly evicted the respondent illegally and by force – The main issue was the maintainability of the suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, and the illegal dispossession – The appellants contended voluntary handover of possession and challenged the maintainability of the suit – The respondent filed a suit within six months of dispossession under Section 6 of the Act – The Trial Court decreed in favor of the respondent, and the High Court dismissed the appellant’s revision – The High Court concurred with the Trial Court on the illegal dispossession and maintainability of the suit – The appeal was dismissed based on concurrent findings and evidence on record – The Supreme Court found no merit in the appeal and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
I P C

“Conspiracy Theory Revived: Supreme Court Orders Trial in Forged Documents Case Involving Government Land” Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 477(A), 120(B) and 34 – The case involves allegations of a conspiracy to illegally transfer government land using forged documents – The respondents, along with others, are accused of manipulating judicial processes and revenue records to acquire government lands – The primary issue is whether the High Court was correct in quashing the order taking cognizance against the respondents, given the evidence of a conspiracy and manipulation of documents – The State argues that the High Court overlooked circumstantial evidence of a broader conspiracy and failed to appreciate the severity of the offences, which could undermine public trust in land administration – The respondents challenged the order of cognizance, arguing insufficient evidence directly implicating them in the conspiracy – The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court’s order, and directed the trial to proceed against the respondents – The Court found that the High Court’s decision was based on an incomplete assessment of facts and that a detailed trial is necessary to fully unravel the extent of the alleged conspiracy – The Court emphasized the need for a thorough examination of evidence and witnesses by the Trial Court to determine the actual harm caused to the public exchequer – The Supreme Court concluded that the case should not be dismissed at the preliminary stage and must be examined judiciously in a trial setting to ensure the integrity of ongoing investigations and judicial processes.

May 5, 2024 sclaw