Advantage Consumer

	advantageconsumer.com Consumer Protection Council, Rourkela

Important judgements passed by the Consumer Courts
Vehicle Booking, etc.

1. Automobile Dealer penalised for rendering deficient service to a self-employed youth.

National Commission, New Delhi
First Appeal No. 95 of 1990

K. Haridasan
Vs.
M/s M.O. Hasan Kuthoos, Maricar Pvt. Ltd.

2. Non refunding of booking advance amounts to deficiency in service.

National Commission ,New Delhi
Original Petition no.29 of 1990

Consumer Protection Council,Rourkela
Vs
M/s.Andhra Pradesh Scooters Ltd.

3. Non refunding of booking advance amounts to deficiency in service.

NATIONAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Original Petition Nos. 15 & 30 of 1990

Mumbai Grahak Panchayat & CPC, Rourkela
Vs.
M/s Lohia Machines Ltd., Kanpur

4. Maruti Udyog penalised for delayed delivery of vehicle

National Commission, New Delhi
First appeal No.576 of 1992

M/s Maruti Udyog ltd.
Vs
Dr. Bhavna Chunnubhai Shah and Ors.

5. If there is a defect in the product and if it is not rectified during the warranty period, then it has to be replaced

State Commission, Orissa, Cuttack
CD APPEAL NO. 250 OF 1998, DECIDED ON 19-6-2001

Bajaj Auto Limited & Another --- Appellants
Vs.
Sri A. Nageswar Rao & Another --- Respondents

6. Misleading advertisement, an Unfair trade practice. Claim of 80 kms. per liter of petrol under standard conditions not intelligible to a layman.

National Commission, New Delhi
Revision Petition No. 831 of 2001

M.R. Ramesh                                        ..    Petitioner
                 Vs.
M/s. Prakash Moped House & Ors.          ..   Respondents

7. Tata Motors directed to rectify all the defects, make the car roadworthy and give a further warranty of 6 months

NATIONAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
REVISION PETITION NO. 1793 OF 2015

TATA MOTORS LTD. ...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
AJAY SINGH & ANR. ...........Respondent(s)

8. Honda Cars directed to compensate for defective braking system

NATIONAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI

REVISION PETITION NO. 2453 OF 2012

M/S. HONDA SIEL CARS INDIA LTD. ...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
M. UNNIKRISHNA MENON & ANR. ...........Respondent(s)

9. TATA Motors penalised for issuing misleading advertisement about the mileage given by its Indigo petrol car.

NATIONAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
REVISION PETITION NO. 2133 OF 2015

TATA MOTORS LTD.    ...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
PRADIPTA KUNDU & ANR.    ...........Respondent(s)

10. Even when the borrower defaults in making the monthly instalments, the Financier cannot forcibly repossess the vehicle, without following proper legal procedure.

NATIONAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
REVISION PETITION NO. 1790 OF 2013

SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO.LTD.& Anr.
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
PANNALAL BAGHEL ...........Respondent(s)

TOP

Consumer Protection Council, Rourkela