Legal News & Views

In a landmark judgment, Hon'ble Supreme Court went to some length to define the cause of action and jurisdiction of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. While deciding in 2014 STPL(Web) 499 SC 1, Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr., the Hon'ble court said, one of the main issues faced by the court (a) from which stage do we consider a offence under Section 138 to have been caused (b) Where would the jurisdiction of the court lie if the cheque was drawn in city A and presented dishonored in City B ? After discussion on various past decisions, the Hon'ble court finally affirmed, " To sum up: (i) An offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is committed no sooner a cheque drawn by the accused on an account being maintained by him in a bank for discharge of debt/liability is returned unpaid for insufficiency of funds or for the reason that the amount exceeds the arrangement made with the bank. (

The state consumer disputes redressal commission in Mumbai has ruled that the purchaser of a residential flat has to pay the current market price in case of any delay in construction and delivery of possession of such flat by the builder for reasons beyond the builder's control. "The principles of fairness and reasonableness require payment of current market price in case of efflux of time and escalation of property price," a two-member bench of the commission, comprising of Justice R C Chavan and member Dhanraj Khamatkar, ruled on August 21. The commission has cited a 2013 Supreme Court judgment while making this observation. City-based real estate firm Kumar Properties had filed an appeal before the commission against a February 28, 2013 order by the additional district consumer disputes redressal forum in Pune directing the firm to execute a registered agreement and sell one of the flats in its scheme in Dhankavadi Padmavati for the price that was agreed for in ye

Indian Railways has been held deficient by a consumer forum here which directed it to pay Rs 15,000 compensation to a retired serviceman, whose bags were damaged by rats in a train. New Delhi Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by C K Chaturvedi, asked the Railways to pay the amount to Delhi resident R K Bansal. "It has happened due to lack of proper maintenance of the compartment by the  loco shed staff where bogies are kept for cleaning and maintenance for further departure but they never bothered to care. Consequently this incident occurred which amounts to be deficiency on the part of Opposite Party (Railways) and lack of supervision of Railway authority," the forum's bench, also comprising its members S R Chaudhary and Ritu Garodia, said. The forum said that Bansal "unnecessarily suffered loss during journey due to lack of proper maintenance and the cleaning of the compartment". "Thus, Divisional Railway Manager (DRM), Northern Railway

A consumer forum here has dismissed a plea seeking mediclaim of Rs three lakh for a man, who died of mouth cancer, noting that the disease was reported within a month of taking the policy and according to the terms there was no deficiency on the part of the insurance company. The New Delhi Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by C K Chaturvedi, rejected the plea filed by the kin of Delhi resident Narender Chhabra, against IFFCO Tokio and Paramount Health Services Pvt Ltd. In its order, the forum noted that the complainants failed to rebut the conditions of policy that the disease, which incepted within 30 days of the policy, was excluded. "In this case, even if we pay no attention to hypertension and diabetes for 12 years or to chewing of tobacco for 15 years, the deceased reported cancerous growth in mouth within one month of taking the policy," it said, while dismissing the complaint. The complainants had told that Chhabra, who had a Med- shield Policy of t

The Supreme Court on Wednesday cleared the scope of revisional power of high courts in rent laws by holding that they "cannot re-appreciate evidence" and perusal of evidence is confined "to find out legality, regularity and propriety" of the order impugned before it. A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice RM Lodha said "the consideration or examination of the evidence by the high court in revisional jurisdiction under these acts (rent control laws of different states) is confined to find out that finding of facts recorded by the court/authority below is according to law and does not suffer from any error of law." The issue was referred to the Constitution Bench as there was conflict in the two decisions of the apex court with one maintaining that the revisional court is not entitled to re-appreciate evidence while another holding that the expression "legality and propriety" enables the revisional court to reappraise the eviden

Real estate firm DLF has been asked to pay Rs 6 lakh to a man, who had booked a flat in its project which failed to take off, by a consumer forum here which held it guilty of deficiency in service and "unfair trade practice". "...we hold opposite party (OP) guilty of deficiency and unfair trade practice in not refunding the deposit. We direct OP to return Rs 5 lakh...and pay compensation of Rs 1 lakh for harassment, deficiency and litigation expenses," New Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by C K Chaturvedi, said. It noted that it was one of the many cases against the construction company with regard to its failed project and directed DLF New Gurgaon Homes Developers Pvt Ltd to pay the money to Gurgaon-based Ashesh Nanda. The forum's bench, also comprising member S R Chaudhary, held that once the project has failed, there is no question of consumer being forced to continue with booking for such a project as it was "only imagi

The Nashik consumer court has ordered Satpur-based New India Insurance Company to settle the entire claim filed by a man, whose vehicle was irretrievable after falling into a 400-ft deep gorge in 2011. Shantaram Thorat, a resident of Panchale in Sinnar, owned a tempo and had insured it for Rs 9.59 lakh. The vehicle was being used as a goods carrier. On October 30, 2011, the vehicle was on its way to the city from Mumbai, when the driver lost control over it after another vehicle veered along its way without any signal. The driver somehow managed to jump out of the tempo, but the vehicle plunged into the gorge in Igatpuri. Later, Thorat tried to retrieve the vehicle but in vain. In February 2012, he filed the insurance claim with company seeking the entire amount. However, the company gave him only Rs 6 lakh and refused to provide the remaining amount saying that since the vehicle was not retrieved, the entire claim could not be settled. "My client filed the claim, but the c

A man's plea seeking claim from an insurance company for loss of his vehicle parts has been dismissed by a consumer forum, which said failure to lodge an FIR for a "period of seven days in case of theft of a vehicle is fatal". While rejecting the plea of Delhi resident Kishan Chand, against National Insurance Co Ltd, West Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by Bimla Makin, said, "There were serious doubts about the genuineness of this claim". "Non-lodging of the FIR for a period of seven days in the case of theft of a vehicle is fatal and adversely affects the rights of the Opposite Party (insurance company) and under facts and circumstances of this case, there are serious doubts about the genuineness of this claim. "Hence...We hold that complaint is time barred and even otherwise there was no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party," the forum said. It noted there were lots of unanswered queries reg

The Hon'ble Supreme Court once again reiterated in PULSIVE TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD.  Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. that - " Even “stop payment” instructions issued to the bank are held to make a person liable for offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act in case cheque is dishonoured on that count. "  The Hon'ble court was hearing an appeal against squashing of a criminal complaint. The fact behind the matter is that the appeallant/complainant  is a private limited company. In the course of its business, the accused received bulk orders from Gujarat Informatics Limited (“GIL”), a Government of Gujarat Company for supply of desktop computers, printers, UPS and other products. The complainant being one of the approved vendors on the list of the GIL, the accused, placed various purchase orders with the complainant and the complainant sold and supplied the same as per the demand and specifications. During the course of business, the accused made part payme

The Supreme Court has resolved an apparent conflict of views in its earlier judgments regarding the validity of gifts and stated that a gift of property would not be invalid if the possession is retained by the donor. "There is no provision in law that ownership in property cannot be gifted without transfer of possession of such property," the judgment said and added that possession of the gifted property is not essential for validity of a gift. In this case, Renikuntla Rajamma vs K Sawranamma, the donor retained the right to use the property during her lifetime. She also received rents. It was contended that since she retained the use of property the gift was invalid. Inasmuch as the gift deed failed to transfer title, possession and the right to deal with the property in absolute terms in favour of the donee the same was no gift in the eyes of law, it was contended. Rejecting the argument, the Supreme Court discussed Sections 122 and 123 of the Transfer of Property Act and

The National Consumer Commission has directed Fortis Health Management (North) Ltd to refund the excess it had charged on its patient, Meenu Jain, holding the hospital in Jaipur guilty of unfair trade practice. The woman was taken to the ventilator in a serious condition where five injections costing Rs 18,990 each was administered daily for five days. She was cured and the entire bill of Rs 7 lakh was paid without protest. Later, it was found that the injections cost only Rs 9,000 in the open market. The hospital did not respond to her request for the bill of the hospital's medical supplier. She moved the district consumer forum for refund of the excess payment. It asked the hospital to pay Rs 2 lakh. The state commission dismissed the hospital's appeal. The National Commission asked the hospital to refund half the price as it had "indirectly imposed unjustified and unreasonable conditions" on the patient. It blamed the patient also for taking an "opportunistic

The Supreme Court has held that destruction of a rented building does not end the lease as long as the land on which the building stood continues to exist. There was conflict of views in its earlier judgments about the continuation of the lease when the building itself was destroyed, for instance by natural calamities. One leading judgement stated that the tenancy ended with the destruction of the building. Another held that the lease of a building included the land on which it stood. Even if the building is destroyed or demolished, the lease does not end as long as the land beneath continued to exist. This latter view was upheld by the larger bench of the Supreme Court in the case, M/s. Shaha Ratansi Khimji & Sons Vs. Proposed Kumbhar Sons Hotel Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. In this case, the tenant of a godown in a plot of land was affected by the digging of basement for a hotel, which bought the land. He moved the civil court which held that his tenancy right had lapsed with the sale of

Terming it guilty of deficiency in services, the district consumer disputes redressal forum has directed a car manufacturer and dealer to pay Rs. 30,000 as compensation to a Sector-30 resident. Kamla Devi had approached the consumer forum against Honda Siel Cars India Limited and its dealer Lally Automobiles Pvt Ltd (Prestige Honda), Industrial Area. Phase 1, Chandigarh. Kamla submitted that she purchased a Honda City car in May 2010. She said after over a year of purchase, she noticed a dent on the vehicle, even though the car had never met with an accident, which could only mean that a used vehicle was sold to her. Denying Kamla's allegations, the car manufacturer and its dealer claimed that the dent could have occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the complainant herself. After hearing the arguments, consumer forum held, “Even though the allegations of the complainant are not really proved, her anxiety on realising the dent in the vehicle, even though there is n

The apex consumer commission has rejected a construction company's appeal with punitive damages of Rs two lakh, saying it was a "merit-less petition" and such "unscrupulous" litigants must be dealt with a "heavy hand". National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) bench, presided by Justice V B Gupta, made the observation while dismissing the appeal of True Zone Buildwell Pvt Ltd against an order of Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which had upheld a district consumer forum's order, asking the company to provide the apartment to a man. NCDRC noted that the company had taken Rs two lakh from one Bhoop Singh in year 2006 for an apartment, without disclosing the area, location and plot number etc. And later on cancelled the allotment. It said that no leniency should be shown to such type of litigants who in order to cover up their own fault and negligence, go on filing merit-less pleas in different foras. "E

Giving an affirmative answer to the question that whether a Magistrate after accepting a negative final report submitted by the Police can take action on the basis of the protest petition filed by the complainant/first informant, the bench of SJ Mukhopadhaya and Ranjan Gogoi, JJ held that that only because the Magistrate has accepted a final report, the same by itself would not stand in his way to take cognizance of the offence on a protest/complaint petition. In the present case, a case was registered under Section 364 IPC by the respondents, before the Supreme Court, against the appellants and two other accused before the Magistrate and on completion of investigation, the investigating officer submitted a final report to the court that no case is made out and the accused have been falsely implicated. However, the Magistrate accepted the final report but simultaneously directed that the case be proceeded with as a complaint case which resulted into a petition before the Allahabad H

In case of compensation claims for road accidents, it is difficult to produce eyewitnesses as evidence as they are reluctant to depose in court. So the court has to believe the oath of the claimant. Making this observation, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal directed the insurer and owner of a lorry to pay 15.21 lakh to the parents of an engineering student who died in an accident in 2007. In their submissions to the tribunal, Udipi Ramesh Rao, of Anna Nagar, said that on August 11, 2007, his son Adithya Rama Rao was riding pillion on a two-wheeler near GNT Road when a lorry, driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit the vehicle. He died on the spot. Adithya, a student of Velammal Engineering College, was returning home after attending classes. As such the owner and the insurer of the vehicle were "vicariously and statutorily liable to pay compensation," said the petition. Denying the claim, New India Insurance Co Ltd said the owner of the vehicle did not report the acc

A bank has been directed by a consumer forum here to pay a compensation of Rs 25,000 to a person for debiting Rs 85 from his account as cheque bounce charge without giving reasons as to why it was dishonoured. New Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by C K Chaturvedi, asked Vijaya Bank to pay the amount to Delhi resident Kamal Krishan Sharma, saying that banks are supposed to "mould themselves in consumer friendly mode", rather than acting as office without any sensitivity. The forum, also comprising members S R Chaudhary and Ritu Garodia, passed the order noting that the cheque bouncing charge was debited without explaining to Sharma why it was levied when a cheque of Rs 1.5 lakh, to be deposited in his account, was awaiting clearance. "In such circumstances, the Opposite Party (bank) should inform the complainant the reason for non-payment, rather than returning the cheque by post with reasons of insufficient funds," the forum said.

The Consumer Protection Act requires a party challenging an order in appeal to deposit the prescribed amount at the time of lodging the appeal. Can the appellate authority direct the appellant to deposit further money to grant conditional stay? This question has recently been decided by the Supreme Court in its July 7 judgment delivered by Justice Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya and Justice V Gopala Gowda in the case of Shreenath Corporation & Others v/s CERS & Others. Case study: Shreenath Corporation had constructed a building and had handed over possession of the flats in 1992. Within nine years of purchase, a portion of the building collapsed in January 2001 due to poor quality of construction. Several flat purchasers were killed while other sustained injuries. With the help of Consumer Education and Research Society (CERS), a complaint was filed against the builder, seeking compensation. The commission upheld the complaint and directed the firm to pay compensation ranging f

The apex consumer commission has asked a real estate company to pay over Rs one crore to a doctor for its failure to give him possession of an apartment, saying that it was making profits at the expense of others. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) bench, presided by Justice J M Malik, asked Mumbai-based Orbit Corporation Ltd to pay Rs 1,17,11,340 to a doctor, holding that this was a case of unfair trade practice. The company had rejected the doctor's claim seeking refund of his money and compensation, citing delay due to several problems which cropped up in the process. The bench, also comprising its member S M Kantikar, said, "We are unable to countenance all these feckless arguments. One must know the significance of a home. It is well said: Home, the spot of earth, supremely blest; A dearer, sweeter spot, than all the rest... "It is difficult to fathom, why the consumer should suffer for his (company) deliberate inaction, negligence and p

A married daughter does not stop being a part of her parents' family, the Bombay high court has ruled in a landmark order. The state's rules that discriminate against a married daughter and exclude her from the purview of the expression "family" were unconstitutional and infringed on fundamental rights, ruled a division bench of Justices Abhay Oka and A S Chandurkar in a case of transfer of a kerosene retail licence. Ranjana Anerao had challenged a government decision in 2007 rejecting her claim to the retail licence held by her deceased mother. The minister for food and civil supplies had said that as a married daughter, she could not be considered a part of her mother's family. "Gender discrimination is prohibited (by) the Constitution," said the judges. "The government resolution of 2004 to the extent it excludes a married daughter from being considered a member of the family of a retail licence holder is discriminatory and violative of th

A daughter-in-law has no right to continue to occupy the self-acquired property of her parents-in-law against their wishes, the Delhi high court has held in a significant order. Justice A K Pathak in a recent verdict, made it clear that a self-acquired property doesn't fall under the definition of a "shared household" enunciated in the Domestic Violence Act and a daughter in law can't enforce her right in such a property. In fact, HC went a step further, holding that even an adult son or daughter has no legal right to occupy the self-acquired property of the parents against their consent. "Daughter-in-law cannot assert her rights, if any, in the property of her parents-in-law wherein her husband has no right, title or interest. She cannot continue to live in such a house of her parents-in-law against their consent and wishes. In my view, even an adult son or daughter has no legal right to occupy the self-acquired property of the parents; against their cons

The Madras High Court has quashed charges against administrators of a medical college and dismissed CBI's petitions opposing discharge of officials of two other medical colleges, saying the investigation agency, or any other external agency for that matter, has no jurisdiction to probe the affairs of a medical college. Quashing the charges against the administrators of a medical college and dismissing CBI's petitions opposing the discharge of officials of two other medical colleges, Justice Aruna Jagadeesan said "contravention of rules and regulations may be an offence against the statute but is not a crime. There is no room or jurisdiction for any external agency to investigate the affairs of any medical institution coming within the purview of the Medical Council of India." In identical set of orders, all delivered on August 6, Justice Jagadeesan said "the shortfall in faculties and submissions of fake/forged documents would only disentitle the institution

A consumer forum has directed HDFC Bank to pay Rs 40,000 to a man for not resolving properly his problem relating to issuance of an illegal bill of his credit card. New Delhi Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by C K Chaturvedi, asked the bank to pay the compensation amount of Rs 40,000 to Delhi resident Radhey Shyam Sharma for its "deficiency and hostile attitude" towards the consumer, saying that the bill issued against him was "illegal". "After considering and receiving the envelope received by complainant (Sharma), we hold that complainant suffered due to some insider in the bank, and complainant cannot be fastened with liability for use of card, without telling him PIN. "Holding Opposite Party (bank) guilty of not resolving the issue in proper way, we hold the bill issued against the complainant as illegal and award a compensation of Rs 40,000 to the complainant inclusive of litigation expenses for the deficiency and hostile attitude to co

The Maharashtra State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission recently reduced the fine slapped on Thane's General Post Office (GPO) by the Thane district consumer redressal forum. The forum had found the GPO guilty of using excess time unnecessarily to complete the procedure of an account transfer. The state commission in its order, however, upheld the district forum's order of holding the postal department guilty of failing to act promptly on the transfer of account. But levying a fine of Rs25,000 on the department would unnecessary increase the burden on the tax payers. Thus, the state commission reduced the fine amount from Rs25,000 to Rs2,500. In 2010, Sudarshan Maini, a Thane resident, had approached the forum and filed a complaint against the GPO for its negligent service. "Maini had a Monthly Income Scheme (MIS) account with the post office in Khajurao, Madhya Pradesh, in which he had deposited an amount of Rs25,000. Accordingly, he was getting a monthly income

The Delhi High Court Tuesday issued notice to the Centre, city government and All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) on a plea by a person seeking a direction to the hospital to provide him free treatment costing nearly Rs. 800,000 for Reiter’s disease. Justice Vibhu Bakhru sought a response from the central and the Delhi government health ministries and the hospital by September 26 while asking them to come up with a solution to the issue. In his petition, Sarvesh, 38, said he has been left crippled and immobile because of the ailment and urgently needs a total hip-and-knee replacement surgery but being poor he cannot afford it. His wife, the only earning member in his family, works as a domestic help in Delhi on a meagre salary of Rs4,000 which is insufficient to feed a family of four, and it is thus impossible for him to arrange Rs800,000 for the surgery, he said in his plea. Sarvesh used to work as a casual labourer before he was immobilised due to Reiter’s diseas

The Bombay high court has clarified that a change in law in 2005 to bring daughters on a par with sons over rights to joint family property can be applied retrospectively. Daughters born any time earlier than September 9, 2005, are entitled to equal rights for inheritance of jointly-owned family property, the court held on Thursday. The judgment delivered by a three-judge bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah, Justice M S Sanklecha and Justice M S Sonak has freed a large number of Hindu women from the son-centric heirship laws that existed till 2005. Now, they will get a share in properties worth crores of rupees in the city. The judgment said that equality would now apply to even girls born prior to 1956, when the Hindu Succession Act first came into effect, but hadn't given daughters equal rights which sons enjoyed since birth over joint family property. In September 2005, a progressive amendment to the Succession Act conferred equal inheritance rights at birth even to daughte

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has raised the compensation in a medical negligence case from `2 lakh awarded by the State Commission to `3,85,672, payable with 6 per cent interest from the date of complaint in 2002. The NCDRC refused to give any relief to the City Hospital in Shimoga and three of its doctors - Dr Mallesh Hullamani (gynaecologist and obstetrician), Dr Shashikala Mallesh (gynaecologist) and Dr Jayappa (anaesthetist) - involved in the case. The complainant, G Rajendra, alleged that his wife Manjula was admitted to the hospital in July 2000 where she delivered her third child. After the delivery, she underwent tubectomy in the same hospital on July 4, 2000. The complaint said that after the operation she lost consciousness and was in coma. She was shifted to a different hospital but was discharged after eight months. Finally, she died at her residence on July 8, 2002. Later, Rajendra registered a complaint with the State Commission again

An insurance company denied the claim of an insured whose son had undergone surgery in both eyes to save his constantly deteriorating vision. The company denied the responsibility saying the surgery was not a medical procedure but cosmetic in nature. The Consumer Forum, however, thought differently. The company has been directed by the Central District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum to pay Rs.1.11 lakh to the complainant who spent the same amount on the ICL implantation of his son, who was diagnosed with pathological myopia in which the vision is lost gradually. The complainant, Rajan Malhotra, had insurance with the New India Assurance Company. When he sought a refund of the claim, the company denied the same saying the surgery was a cosmetic procedure and was, therefore, not covered in the policy. Before the forum also, it maintained that the claim was not payable and rightly rejected. It also said that the claim of Mr. Malhotra had been put before a medical board too whi

In a landmark ruling, a consumer court has ordered realty firm Ambience Infrastructure to pay Rs. 33.38 crore to a group of flat owners in Gurgaon for installing sub-standard elevators and failing to maintain them despite charging them for it. This gives hope to hundreds of thousands of home buyers, especially in the backdrop of Supreme Court’s order on Wednesday to Supertech to refund buyers of flats in its Noida twin towers, which now face demolition. In a country witnessing rapid urbanisation, the real estate sector remains largely unregulated and home buyers are often left to deal with builders who default on delivery of promises. According to the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission’s ruling, Ambience Infrastructure has to pay 66 apartment owners in Ambience Lagoon complex 70% of maintenance charges collected since November 2002 within 90 days. It also has to pay 9% interest per annum, taking the total to Rs. 33.38 crore. “The judgment was delivered on March 19 an

A consumer forum here has asked an insurance company to pay over Rs 4.5 lakh to a man, whose medicalim it had rejected, for indulging in unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. The North-East Delhi Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by N K Goel, directed Oriental Insurance Company Ltd to pay Rs 4,53,678 to Delhi resident Vinay Jain towards his medical expenditure, compensation and litigation expenses. "...We hold that while rejecting the claim in question of the complainant, OP (Oriental Insurance Company Ltd) indulged in unfair trade practice and committed gross deficiency in service," the forum, also comprising members Asha Kumar and Nishat Ahmad Alvi, said. The forum noted that the insurance company had cited its alleged circular, which was "non-existent" at the time, to justify rejection of the claim. The company claimed that as per the circular, continuity benefit could be given only if the policy was continuously insured with Orienta

A jewellery firm was denied insurance claim for its damaged car by a consumer forum which said the vehicle was carelessly driven in heavily waterlogged area without considering the consequences. West Delhi Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by Bimla Makin, rejected the plea of Gujranwala Jewellers seeking Rs 5,12,357 from Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd, with which the car was insured, for the damaged vehicle. "As the complainant's car was not parked under Wazirpur underbridge and was driven into the waterlogged underbridge carelessly and without (any) regard to the consequences that may follow in driving through heavily waterlogged underbridge... "The Opposition Party (company) cannot be held liable for the loss or damage caused to vehicle due to own act of complainant in the present case. Hence, the company rightly rejected the claim of the complainant," the forum said. The forum also said that the noise emanating from the engine was i

District consumer disputes redressal forum, Chandigarh, has directed an insurance company to pay Rs. 50,000 as compensation to a Nayagoan resident for deficient services, after her claim for a stolen vehicle was denied. Disposing of a complaint filed by Saleena Rani, a resident of Naya Gaon, district SAS Nagar, the consumer forum also directed United India Insurance Company Limited, to pay Rs. 7,000 as cost of litigation. The insurance company has also been ordered to pay Rs. 4.99 lakh to Tata Motors Finance Limited as the vehicle was under hypothecation with it. The consumer forum presided over by Rajan Dewan on July 17, held the insurance company deficient in services and guilty of unfair trade practices for rejecting the claim on the grounds that the vehicle was not registered within one month of purchase. The consumer forum’s order said: “Even if vehicle was not registered within the prescribed period, the insurance company could not have repudiated theclaim. Otherwise als

The Delhi High Court has held an accused in a cheque dishonour case can settle the issue with the complainant even outside the court at any stage prior to the execution of punishment. "There is no legal bar to the compounding of such an offence, either during or even after disposal of an appeal filed either by the accused or by the complainant," Justice V K Jain said. The court, which was to pronounce the quantum of sentence after finding a couple guilty under section 138 (cheque bounce case) of the Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act, had to deal with the legal issue as to whether a convict can be allowed to settle the case at the eleventh hour of the judicial proceedings just to avoid the imminent penalty. Referring to the relevant legal provision, the court said, "It would, thus, be seen that in view of the non obstante clause contained in the Section, the restrictions and limitations prescribed under CrPC with respect to compounding of offences would not be applic

Since shares are "traded", consumer fora treat it as a commercial dispute which is not maintainable. In a recent judgement, the National Commission has differentiated between trading in shares and purchase of shares as an investment, and ruled that an applicant for shares is a consumer. Arpitha Reddy had paid an amount of Rs 1 lakh by cheque and Rs 1.40 lakhs in installments through cash payment for allotment of shares of Venve Light Metal Ltd. The company had acknowledged receipt of this money in its Board meeting. Yet, neither were the shares issued nor was the money refunded. Arpitha had a legal notice issued to the company, which responded by asking her to furnish particulars of the payments to look into the complaint. Arpitha produced a copy of the Board Resolution and her bank statement to substantiate her claim. She also relied on a agreement between her and the company for issue of shares worth Rs 2.4 lakhs. The company then admitted receipt of the cash component