Consumer Archives - Page 3 of 21 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

February 22, 2025 9:27 pm

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

In any event, from the very details furnished by the respondents, the instance of myositis being minimal to the extent of 0.02 in a million, to contend that there was negligence on the part of the respondent is also not acceptable.

Sep 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRAKASH BANG — Appellant Vs. GLAXO SMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. )…

Consumer

Insurance Policy – Mere knowledge on the part of the insurer that there was a breach of warranty would not amount to a waiver in the absence of an express representation to that effect.

Aug 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HIND OFFSHORE PVT. LTD. — Appellant Vs. IFFCO – TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and M.M. Sundresh,…

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.…

Consumer

Insurance Law – It is not open to an insurance company to ignore or fail to act upon a certificate or document that it had itself called for from independent and impartial authorities, subject to just exceptions, merely because it is averse to it or to its detriment

Aug 10, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. ISNAR AQUA FARMS — Appellant Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and Sanjay Kumar, JJ. )…

You missed

C P C

A suit in representative capacity (Order 1, Rule 8 CPC) is not maintainable if lacking locus standi, and a prior decree (res judicata) bars subsequent suits on the same subject matter, notwithstanding varying reliefs.

Feb 16, 2025 sclaw

Stamp Act State Laws

Agreement to sell immovable property incurs stamp duty as deemed conveyance via implied/symbolic possession transfer, with duty applying to the agreement (instrument), not the sale (transaction).

Feb 16, 2025 sclaw

Accident

The Supreme Court emphasized that the goal is to ensure just and fair compensation, even if it exceeds the claimed amount. It recalculated the compensation, considering the claimant’s monthly income, future prospects, 40% permanent disability, medical expenses, attendant charges, special diet and transportation, pain and suffering, and loss of income during treatment. The final compensation was determined to be Rs. 17,82,825, modifying the awards of the MACT and High Court. The Civil Appeal was allowed, with interest as awarded by the Tribunal. This decision underscores the principle of providing fair compensation to accident victims based on comprehensive assessment of their losses and suffering.

Feb 9, 2025 sclaw

Child Custody

In child custody cases, the lawpoint is that the welfare of the minor child is the paramount consideration, and a Habeas Corpus writ petition is maintainable only when the child’s detention is proven illegal or without legal authority

Feb 9, 2025 sclaw

Category: Consumer

You missed