Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.17 seconds)M/S. Ansal Housing & Constructin Ltd. vs Indian Machinery Co. on 24 May, 2013
5. Learned District Forum has placed reliance
upon a precedent of the Hon'ble National Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission in R.P. No.1931 of
2013, titled Ansal Housing and Construction Limited
versus Indian Machinery Company, decided on
24.05.2013, while upholding the respondents'
objection that the second complaint is not
maintainable.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs R. Srinivasan on 28 February, 2000
(F.A. No.378/2014)
________________________________________________________________________
of appearance of the plaintiff, does not apply to the
consumer complaints. Of course, it has also been
observed in the said judgment that the complainant
should have offered some explanation for not
pursuing the earlier complaint, but in that case also as
it appears from a reading of para-20 the complainant
had not given any explanation. The Hon'ble Supreme
Court looking into the facts and circumstances of the
case, particularly the fact that respondent/opposite
party had not disputed certain facts entitling the
appellant/complainant to the relief, under the
Consumer Protection Act, held that the subsequent
complaint was maintainable.
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Consumer Protection Act, 2019
1