The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission stayed execution of bailable warrants issued against Salman Khan in a misleading advertisement complaint. The Commission also sought complete records, including contempt proceedings under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Salman Khan approached the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission alleging unfair treatment by the Jaipur consumer forum in a misleading advertisement case. The Jaipur commission issued bailable warrants over non-compliance with directions to remove the “Rajshree Elaichi” advertisement.
The Supreme Court ruled that exclusion clauses in insurance policies must be interpreted strictly and any ambiguity must benefit the insured. The Court held that when loss is caused by fire, the reason behind the fire becomes irrelevant for insurance liability.
The Supreme Court has stayed the NCDRC’s order directing United India Insurance to pay ₹82.8 lakh to Rajasthan Royals over Sreesanth’s 2012 IPL injury, putting the high-profile insurance dispute under further judicial review.
The Supreme Court has ruled that consumer forums can enforce all their orders like civil court decrees, ending an 18-year gap caused by a 2002 amendment. The judgment ensures consumers get real justice and not just “paper victories.”
The NCDRC ruled that an insurance claim cannot be denied merely because a column was left blank in the proposal form, slamming Bharti Axa Life Insurance for rejection.
WhatsApp has filed a petition in the Allahabad High Court against a ruling by the Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Commission, which allowed a consumer complaint regarding a service disruption to proceed in Indian courts. The high court has put the proceedings on hold until further notice, with the next hearing scheduled for July.
The Supreme Court has upheld the validity of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 provisions, ruling that pecuniary jurisdiction must be based on the actual amount paid for goods or services, not the compensation claimed.
The Supreme Court ruled that a borrower does not qualify as a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act if the loan is taken for profit-making purposes. A bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prashant Kumar Mishra made this observation while hearing an appeal by the Central Bank of India against a decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC). The ruling clarifies the scope of consumer rights in financial transactions.
The Chairman of Maruti Suzuki approached the Delhi High Court to quash an FIR filed against him. In response, the court has directed the authorities to submit a status report on the case. The matter is now under judicial review to assess the validity of the allegations. The court’s decision will determine the next legal steps in the case.
