Order Date: 19th July 2024
Order Name: National Insurance Company Ltd. and Anr. vs Kanchan Paliyal and Anr.
Case No.: Not Available
NCDRC Rulings: Key Takeaways for Consumers
Misleading Advertising by Institutes:
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has held the New Delhi Institute of Management Studies accountable for misleading a student about an MBA course association. The student was falsely assured that the course was linked with Madhuraj Kamraj University.
- Case Title: New Delhi Institute of Management Studies vs Shamaneshwaram and 2 Ors.
- Case No.: Revision Petition No. 346-347 of 2019
Accuracy in Insurance Proposal Forms:
The NCDRC ruled that the insured must strictly follow the information provided in their insurance proposal form. This decision came after Life Insurance Corporation’s revision petition was allowed.
- Case Title: Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. Reena Agarwal
- Case No.: R.P. No. 849/2020
Limited Revisional Powers of the National Commission:
The NCDRC clarified that its powers are limited to jurisdictional errors or irregularities. It cannot overturn factual findings by lower forums.
- Case Title: Rajesh Singh vs. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.
- Case No.: R.P. No. 887/2019
Reasonable Forfeiture of Earnest Money:
The NCDRC stated that forfeiture of earnest money must be reasonable and supported by actual proof of damage.
- Case Title: Dhruv Upadhyaya vs. M/S Capital Heights Pvt Ltd.
- Case No.: C.C. No. 963/2017
Non-Interference with Lower Fora Findings:
The NCDRC reiterated that it cannot interfere with concurrent factual findings made by the District Forum and the State Commission.
- Case Title: Shashikala Baranwal vs. Union of India & Anr.
- Case No.: R.P. No. 783/2023
Qualification to Treat ICU Patients:
Doctors with an MD in medicine are qualified to treat ICU patients without additional intensive care training, according to the NCDRC.
- Case Title: V.C. Rawat vs. Akshaya Hospital
- Case No.: F.A. No. 587/2023
Delays in Flat Possession:
The NCDRC held Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd. responsible for delaying flat possession despite timely part-payments.
- Case Title: S.K. Rathore vs. Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd. and Anr.
- Case No.: First Appeal No. 44 of 2018
Builder Delays:
K. Soni Builders were found liable for not delivering flat possession within the agreed time.
- Case Title: Shashi Bansal and Anr. vs K Soni Builders
- Case No.: First Appeal No. 1371 of 2018
Importance of Survey Reports:
The NCDRC emphasized that survey reports in insurance claims must be given due consideration unless they ignore material evidence or misrepresent facts.
- Case Title: M/s Bhupinder Tyres Works vs New India Assurance Company Ltd.
- Case No.: First Appeal No. 1275 of 2014
Immediate FIR Filing for Vehicle Theft:
The NCDRC ruled that while delays in notifying the insurance company can be excused, filing an FIR for vehicle theft must be immediate.
- Case Title: National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Md. Sallauddin
- Case No.: Revision Petition No. 803 of 2020
Deficiency in Service by Builders:
DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd. was found guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practices for not executing a plot-buyer’s agreement and charging an excessive forfeiture amount.
- Case Title: Kuldeep Singh and Anr. vs DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.
- Case No.: C.C. No. 1937 of 2017
State and District Commission Highlights
Insurance Contract Good Faith:
The Madhya Pradesh State Commission ruled that suppression of material facts in insurance contracts can lead to repudiation.
- Case Title: Hariram Singh Kushwaha vs Life Insurance Corporation of India
- Case No.: First Appeal No. 1442 of 2019
Evidentiary Value of Surveyor’s Report:
The Madhya Pradesh State Commission stated that a surveyor’s report holds significant evidentiary value and cannot be disregarded without valid reasons.
- Case Title: Alok Khandelwal vs Branch Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company and Others
- Case No.: First Appeal No. 1303 of 2017
Pesticide Damage to Crops:
The Haryana State Commission held ADAMA India Pvt. Ltd. and its seller accountable for delivering defective pesticides that damaged crops.
- Case Title: ADAMA India Pvt. Vs Jitender and Anr.
- Case No.: First Appeal No. 1267 of 2018
Minors Considered One Unit in Accident Claims:
The Uttarakhand State Commission ruled that two minors in a vehicle should be treated as one unit for accident claims.
- Case Title: National Insurance Company Ltd. and Anr. vs Kanchan Paliyal and Anr.
- Case No.: Not Available
Unauthorized Use of Electricity:
The Madhya Pradesh State Commission held that unauthorized electricity use does not fall within the Consumer Protection Act’s scope.
- Case Title: M.P. Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitran and Anr. vs Smt. Renu Sikarwar
- Case No.: First Appeal No. 1643 of 2023
Fraud Allegations Outside Consumer Forum:
The Delhi State Commission decided that consumer forums lack jurisdiction over fraud allegations.
- Case Title: Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. vs Mrs. Pramila Bhatia and Anr.
- Case No.: FA No. 692/2023
Unsatisfactory Auto Modifications:
The Haryana State Commission held an auto workshop liable for unsatisfactory modification work and overcharging.
- Case Title: Amit Auto Works vs Mewa Singh
- Case No.: First Appeal No. 1429 of 2023
Airline Cancellation Issues:
The Chandigarh District Commission found Air India liable for not providing an alternate flight or refunding the ticket price for a canceled flight.
- Case Title: Amarinder Singh vs Air India Limited and Ors.
- Case No.: C.C. No. 13/2020
Train Stop Changes:
The Chandigarh District Commission held IRCTC and Indian Railways liable for last-minute stoppage changes and failing to refund the ticket price.
- Case Title: Bhartendu Sood and Anr. vs Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation and Anr.
- Case No.: C.C. No. 148 of 2023
Defective Smartwatch:
The Bangalore District Commission held Titan liable for selling a defective smartwatch and not addressing the complaint.
- Case Title: Mr. Nagateja P. vs The Authorised Signatory, World of Titan
Compensation for Defective Tiles:
The Ernakulam Consumer Commission ordered compensation for Malayalam film actor Harishree Ashokan due to defective tiles and poor craftsmanship.
- Case Title: P.K. Ashokan vs Peekay Tiles Centre
- Case No.: C.C. No. 209/2018
Online Purchase Issues:
The Bangalore District Commission held Amazon liable for failing to refund despite receiving returned items.
- Case Title: Deepthi Bhavanam vs Amazon
- Case No.: CC No. 352/2023
Defective Mobile Phones:
The Bangalore District Commission found Cashify liable for selling a defective mobile phone and not honoring the warranty.
- Case Title: Mr. Deepak P. vs M/s. Cashify
- Case No.: CC/343/2023
Wrongful Insurance Claim Repudiation:
The Kullu District Commission held New India Assurance Co. liable for wrongfully repudiating a genuine claim.
- Case Title: Chhering Dolma vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
- Case No.: Complaint No. 14/2022
Restrictive Trade Practices:
The Ernakulam District Commission held Sony and its service agent liable for withholding spare parts and forcing the complainant to buy a new product.
- Case Title: Abdul Razzak vs Sony India and Anr.
- Case No.: C.C. No. 461/2019
Incorrect Food Delivery:
The Ludhiana District Commission held Behrouz Biryani and Swiggy liable for delivering non-veg biryani instead of veg biryani.
- Case Title: Vasu Gupta vs Behrouz Biryani and Anr.
- Case No.: Complaint No. 105 dated 17.03.2022
Recurring Scooter Issues:
The Ernakulam District Commission found Honda Motorcycle and its seller liable for recurring issues with a new scooter.
- Case Title: Nidhi Jain vs Honda Motorcycle and Scooter India Pvt. Ltd.
- Case No.: Complaint Case No. CC/22/50
Unauthorized Credit Cards:
The Chandigarh District Commission held HDFC Bank and Phoenix ARC liable for demanding payment for unauthorized credit cards.
- Case Title: Paramjit Kaur Pasricha vs HDFC Bank Ltd and Anr.
- Case No.: CC No. 539/2023
Health Insurance Claim Issues:
The East Godavari District Commission held Aditya Birla Health Insurance Co. liable for wrongfully rejecting a valid health insurance claim.
- Case Title: Alluri Venkata Rama Raju vs Aditya Birla Capital and Anr.
- Case No.: CC No. 67/2023
Takeaway:
Consumers should be aware of their rights regarding misleading advertisements, insurance claims, and service deficiencies. The NCDRC and state commissions provide a platform to address these grievances and ensure service providers are held accountable. Always ensure to read the fine print in agreements and maintain all necessary documentation to support your claims.
