Please let me know any case heard by any hon’ble high court and decision given by high court on the same case if does not satisfy to any of the party gives right to them to make an appeal against the same order before the Hon’ble Supreem Court in India. Please confirm & oblige.
Thanks and with best regards.
Purushottam Ramawat

CommentsLikeUnlike 0 People liked this

Dear Experts,
My parents have been living in ground floor of housing board apartments in Chennai for the last 30 years. For the last 25 years, there has been seepage from the first floor and the owner is adamant on not repairing the issue. We have spent internally money to solve the issue within our flat but it doesnt happen – the solution is temproray. The owner of the flat above (first floor) even didnt allow the president of the society to come in and was asked to get out of the house. Such is the nuisance of the owner.
Note: We have letters dated from 1989 which have been sent to the president of the society requesting him to repair the seepage. We even have the responses from the owner of the flat above us.
Following are my queries
1) Can we file a legal suit against them – if yes under which section?
2) Realisitcally speaking, how many years do you foresee such a case to come to conclusion?
3) How strong or weak can a case be in such a scenario? He can just say that he did some repair 1 /2 years back and get away? ( He hasnt done any repair and the seepage still persists.)
Currently the flat owner from which we are getting seepage – is the presidnet of the society
3) There are about 138 flats in the society and around 10-20 flats would definitely be having seepage – can we all go together and file a complaint against the issue?
Since the president himself is not repairing such an issue, the other flat owners from which seepage starts are not ready to repair their issue – setting a bad state.
My parents have suffered a lot and I am now willing to fight for my parents basic rights to live in a proper place.
Please help and suggest your views.
Thanks & Regards
Krishna

CommentsLikeUnlike 0 People liked this

Sir
I have orderd a LED TV online purchase from M/s.satyabazaar. Tuticorin
It was received by me with following observation:
(1)Seril no. on TV is different from Invoiced One.
(2.)Resolution mentioned while ordered is 1920 x 1080 whereas received one is 1366 x760 ,
(3) they mentioned while ordering is Full HD but they supplied HD ready
(4) inside Packing is not Original Tv Mfg.Packing.
Hence I rejected. Then i talk to them above differences, they said overphone you can return through “First Flight Courier to- pay basis Accordingly as it is packed in same box I handed over to their courier. on 4th Mar’13 evening and intimated through mail to them. it was reached their place on 6th Mar’13 & delivered to them on 9th mar’13 morning then they talk to me on 9th Mar’13 stating that tv panels broken. Now they say ask me to talk to First Fligh Courier if they does’t agree to pay the compensation i have to pay.
Please suggest me sir what to do legally.
Thanks & Regard

CommentsLikeUnlike 0 People liked this

I have purchase flat in appt in year Feb 2011, done agreement & given 80% amount by taking loan, I have paid EMI from last 24 month till time I have not get possession of property, Pl suggest what i need to do?

CommentsLikeUnlike 0 People liked this

Sir,
I would like to know how much land (agriculture as well private property for building etc), an Indian citizen can own as an individual?

MThx

Nandan

CommentsLikeUnlike 0 People liked this

can a execution petition can be referred to mediation cell by a consumer court

CommentsLikeUnlike 0 People liked this

Sub: Conscious and deliberate Contempt of Court by Consumer Dispute Redressal
Forum -Kasargode, Kerala
Ref:

1. Supreme Court Judgment – Civil Appeal no 7687/2004((2009) 8 SCC 481),
2. RP 1703/10 (Prakash Verma Vs Idea Cellular Ltd) of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
3. RP 3780/2011 -Lokesh Parashar Vs Idea order dated 20.04.2012 of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
4. RP NO. 1703 OF 2010 National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dated 21.05.2010
5. A No 295/2010 MP State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dated 10.02.2010
6. A/10/526 of Kerala State Consumer Dispute Redressal Comission, Trivandrum ,Kerala dated 13.10.2011
7. A/11/424 of Kerala State Consumer Dispute Redressal Comission, Trivandrum ,Kerala dated 22.2.2012
8. A/11/508 of Kerala State Consumer Dispute Redressal Comission, Trivandrum ,Kerala dated 28.01.2012
9. CC 77/11 dated 31.05.2012-order OF CDRF Kasargod
10. CC188/10 DATED 31.12.2010- order OF CDRF Kasargod
11. CC16/11 DATED 20.04.2011- order OF CDRF Kasargod
12. CC 238/10 DATED 28.07.2011- order OF CDRF Kasargod

Sir
1. I here by inviting your kind attention to conscious and deliberate disobedience of the Hon’ble Supreme court’s, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s and State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission’s judgment/order by the Hon’ble District Consumer forum Kasargode, Kerala in many cases by interpreting their own interpretation.
2. It is submitted that, the Hon’ble Supreme court of India in General Manager, Telecom vs. M. Krishnan and another-CA 7687/2004 dated 01.09.2009 reported as 2009 (8) SCC 481 made it clear that the matters relating to telegraph lines and other connections can be referred to the arbitration under Section 7 B of the Telegraph Act and such disputes cannot be brought under the ambit of Consumer Protection Act.
3. It is also seen that the National Commission has held the similar view wherein and whereby the Hon’ble Commission has held that any dispute between the subscriber and the telegraph authority can be resolved by taking to arbitration proceedings only. It has been made clear in “Prakash Verma Vs. Idea Cellular Ltd., and another” (Revision Petition No. 1703/2010 decided on 21/5/2010.)
4. It is submitted that ,the Kerala State Commission also dismissed many Appeals by relying the decision of the Hon’ble supremen court and the national commission.
5. The National commission in RP 1703/2010, dismissed the complaint filed by the petitioner relying upon the judgement of Supreme Court in General Manager Telecom vs. M.Krishnan & Anr. – (2009)8 SCC 481 and held that ,

“The judgement of the Supreme Court is binding on all the subordinate courts. There is no scope for interference. Dismissed”

It is submitted that, the fact is being so, without jurisdiction the Hon’ble District Forum, Kasargode, is entertaining the cases which are related to subscriber and telegraph authority, which is barred by the Hon’ble Supreme court ,National and State commission by giving a different interpretation .

It is important to note that, even though the Hon’ble State commission has set aside 3 orders of the same Forum, again the forum below, without considering the previous orders of the State Commission ,entertains similar cases and passing orders against the Telecommunication operators without any jurisdiction.

It is important to note that , in A/526/10 order dated 13.10.2011, A508508/11 order dated 28.01.2012 and A 424/11 order dated 22.2.2012 the state commission undoubtedly held that ,as per the Hon’ble supreme courts judgment and the orders of the National Commission ,the Forum below has no jurisdiction to entertain the cases which are related to telecom operation .

But surprisingly and Shockley the forum below passed another award against the Bharati Airtel Ltd on 31.05.2012 (CC77/11 copy of the order is available in CONFONET ) by giving their on interpretation and deliberately disobeyed ,insulted the hierarchy of Courts and especially Art 141 of the constitution.

My question is ,is it a proper order, or is it a deliberate act of the Forum below,or is it prejudiced, immature and insulting the dignity of the Higher Judicial Authority, moreover the disobedience of principles of the Constitution of India.

My another question- Forum have a right to interpret the SC judgments like given below

The Hon’ble CDRF ,Kasargod , by its order (CC77/11, CC 16/11,CC 238/10 copy of the order is available in CONFONET ) clarifies that ..The Judgment sited above 1 is per incuriam since it is passed ignoring the decision of larger bench.

. His Lordship Markandey Katju, J. in “State of U.P. Versus Jeet S. Bisht” (supra), in para No.66 and 67 of the judgment has observed as under:
It is well settled that a mere direction of the Supreme Court without laying down any principle of law is not a precedent. It is only where the Supreme Court lays down a principle of law that it will amount to a precedent.
In Municipal Committee, Amritsar Vs. Hazara Singh, AIR 1975 SC 1087, the Supreme Court observed that only a statement of law in a decision is binding. In State of Punjab Vs. Baldev Singh, 1999 (6) SCC 172, the Court observed that everything in a decision is not a precedent. In Delhi Administration Vs. Manoharlal, AIR 2002 SC 3088, the Supreme Court observed that a mere direction without laying down any principle of law is not a precedent. In Divisional Controller, KSRTC Vs .Sahadeva Shetty, 2003 (7) SCC 197, this Court observed as follows:
“….. The decision ordinarily is a decision on the case before the Court, while the principle underlying the decision would be binding as a precedent in a case which comes up for decision subsequently. The scope and authority of a precedent should never be expanded unnecessarily beyond the needs of a given situation. The only thing binding as an authority upon a subsequent judge is the principle, upon which the Case was decided…..”.
The another findings of the Hon’ble CDRF, Kasargode is as follows.

1. Consumer protection is a special law

In “General Manager, Telecom Versus M. Krishnan & Others” (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the special law prevails over the general law. But the point whether the Consumer Protection Act is a special enactment or a general law has not been discussed. On the other hand, in view of the other judgments, reference of which has been given above, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has declared the Consumer Protection Act as a special legislation. Time and again it has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court of country that where a law is declared after thorough discussion, only then it is held as a binding precedent and not otherwise

CommentsLikeUnlike 0 People liked this

Sir, namaskar, my land has been tansferred by a person using GPA which was revoked long ago, and that is why i filed a civil and criminal case against the buyers and the revoked gpa holder. to fight the case the lawer charged rs two lacs as full and final fee in advance. but he refused the cheque and demanded cash which we gave him. he filed the case and later on he showed us another lawer who also charged fee which we gave him. the first lawer now refuses to recognize us. as a consumer ,do i have right to sue my lawer who is very influential and fights big polititians cases etc.. where should i complain? to the bar council or in the consumer court. I fear he may try to influence and weaken my stand as he is a very high profile advocate in bangalore. please advise.waiting for answers from your side where i can take a right decision.and my rights are preserved.

CommentsLikeUnlike 0 People liked this

I reside in an apartment in Bangalore within a residential complex which has around 400 apartments; the owners have formed an association which is registered with the Registrar of Societies, Govt. of Karnataka. The office bearers of the association are elected by the block representatives (one for each block of apartments) and the residents pay maintenance fees to the association for the upkeep of common areas and facilities.
I own an open parking slot in the apartment premises as do most other residents in the apartments. A problem started recently when one of the coconut trees planted in the gardens adjoining the parking slot bent obliquely on the parking slot; dry coconut leaves and other matter started falling directly on my car causing dents and other damages. I got it repaired after making insurance claim and informed the president of the association via email of the situation requesting him to find a solution. He said that he will look into the matter but no action was taken in this regard. My car suffered further damages again when dry leaves started falling again causing dents. My repeated verbal requests to have the tree removed/ pruned were ignored again.
I feel that being a resident who pays the maintenance fees due to the association well on time, I can demand the tree be removed as a permanent solution. The association utterly disregards my suggestion nor does it provide any solution for my problem. I also feel that it is my imperative to claim for the damages caused the second time due to the deficiency in the services provided by the association to me as a resident.
I want to seek the following clarification from the people in this forum:
1. Whether the stand I have taken legally valid and enforceable?
2. Does this case needs to be taken up from a regular court or shall I approach consumer forum?
3. Who is to be held liable for the damages caused to my car, the association or the office bearers?
4. If the office bearers change and new office bearers get elected, who should be held responsible?
5. In case I send a legal notice through my lawyer, the association my send it back without accepting the registered post, how to deal with this situation?

CommentsLikeUnlike 0 People liked this

Your complaint is very sensitive. You may brought an action under Consumer Protection Act against the Company. Besides, you may prefer Criminal Case also under section 406 I.P.C.

CommentsLikeUnlike 0 People liked this