w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



M/s. Sbi Cards & Payments Services Ltd., New Delhi v/s Vishal Sabharwal & Another


Company & Directors' Information:- I SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72900DL2003PTC118851

Company & Directors' Information:- S T SERVICES LTD [Active] CIN = L74140WB1989PLC047210

Company & Directors' Information:- VISHAL CORPORATION LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74992DL2011PLC224094

Company & Directors' Information:- M G F SERVICES LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U65910DL1987PLC029599

Company & Directors' Information:- R S SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65100DL1989PTC038061

Company & Directors' Information:- R S SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900DL1989PTC038061

Company & Directors' Information:- S J SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140DL1988PTC034427

Company & Directors' Information:- AMP E - SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909MN2013PTC008361

Company & Directors' Information:- E M SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U93090MH2001PTC131924

Company & Directors' Information:- L M J SERVICES LTD [Active] CIN = L51226WB1983PLC035807

Company & Directors' Information:- L M J SERVICES LTD [Active] CIN = L93000WB1983PLC035807

Company & Directors' Information:- G K SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65990MH1994PTC078529

Company & Directors' Information:- A K SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899MH1986PTC268851

Company & Directors' Information:- B V SERVICES PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74140WB1991PTC050946

Company & Directors' Information:- I S A SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140JH1995PTC006387

Company & Directors' Information:- VISHAL INDIA LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900MP1989PLC005475

Company & Directors' Information:- E I C SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1985PTC022426

Company & Directors' Information:- A C SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1995PTC070774

Company & Directors' Information:- H S SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900KA2014PTC074321

Company & Directors' Information:- CARDS SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1995PTC074505

Company & Directors' Information:- G V INDIA SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900DL2010PTC212026

Company & Directors' Information:- O P T SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63013DL1996PTC083397

Company & Directors' Information:- P P SERVICES PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U70101WB1991PTC051423

Company & Directors' Information:- A P T SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U29219TG1999PTC031903

Company & Directors' Information:- S S SERVICES PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U51109AS1993PTC003956

Company & Directors' Information:- G & G SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201DL2012PTC230905

Company & Directors' Information:- VISHAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U24117KA1979PTC003483

Company & Directors' Information:- A N Y SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1995PTC071457

Company & Directors' Information:- N B SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1993PTC056484

Company & Directors' Information:- P C SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U00894KA1985PTC006606

Company & Directors' Information:- M. V. S SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U93000DL2013PTC252172

Company & Directors' Information:- S D SERVICES PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U51109AS1998PTC005293

Company & Directors' Information:- H AND B SERVICES LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U72900MH2004PTC145775

Company & Directors' Information:- C & R SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140KA1996PTC019645

Company & Directors' Information:- E AND A SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U51900MH1989PTC054373

Company & Directors' Information:- A. H. SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74990MH2009PTC193917

Company & Directors' Information:- P F P SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900MH2009PTC293633

Company & Directors' Information:- P F P SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900WB2009PTC139742

Company & Directors' Information:- VISHAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140JH2008PTC013154

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA SERVICES LIMITED [Liquidated] CIN = U99999TN1946PLC000976

Company & Directors' Information:- U M S SERVICES LIMITED [Active] CIN = U03210TZ1982PLC001208

Company & Directors' Information:- SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140DL1996PTC078465

Company & Directors' Information:- G I SERVICES INDIA LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140DL2008PLC184088

Company & Directors' Information:- E AND E SERVICES LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U65992KL1988PLC005094

Company & Directors' Information:- B H SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999MH2012FTC227035

Company & Directors' Information:- A R SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U00000DL2001PTC109578

Company & Directors' Information:- J AND J SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51900MH1995PTC092554

Company & Directors' Information:- M P SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999PN1999PTC013531

Company & Directors' Information:- M C SERVICES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999PN1999PTC013532

Company & Directors' Information:- S C L SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63012TN2001PTC046650

Company & Directors' Information:- B L AND CO NEW DELHI PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1968PTC004910

Company & Directors' Information:- A B SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74140DL1998PTC093545

Company & Directors' Information:- G P SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1989PTC037683

Company & Directors' Information:- T S SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U85320WB2003PTC095712

Company & Directors' Information:- S S SERVICES PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U74140WB1988PTC044009

Company & Directors' Information:- S S D SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74910RJ1996PTC012694

Company & Directors' Information:- V & V SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74990MH2010PTC206211

Company & Directors' Information:- D S SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U65923MH2012PTC226482

Company & Directors' Information:- P AND I SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63090MH1981PTC024997

Company & Directors' Information:- F F C SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900PN2014PTC153348

Company & Directors' Information:- R. B. SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999MH2017PTC302692

Company & Directors' Information:- S N SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900JK2014PTC004110

Company & Directors' Information:- R N SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900CH2013PTC034757

Company & Directors' Information:- NEW DELHI E SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72900DL2007PTC165097

Company & Directors' Information:- DELHI SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999DL1950PTC001721

Company & Directors' Information:- V. S. SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999DL2012PTC233958

Company & Directors' Information:- S & V SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999DL2015PTC287145

Company & Directors' Information:- M K R SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U93000DL2012PTC242159

Company & Directors' Information:- R K SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200HR2007PTC041783

Company & Directors' Information:- V J SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29242GJ2013PTC074510

Company & Directors' Information:- N I SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U64202KL2000PTC014355

Company & Directors' Information:- F I SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999DL2001PTC113001

Company & Directors' Information:- B I M SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74140KA1974PTC002694

Company & Directors' Information:- B AND M SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74140MH1977PTC019880

    Revision Petition No. 2098 of 2019

    Decided On, 16 June 2020

    At, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. PREM NARAIN
    By, PRESIDING MEMBER

    For the Petitioner: Gurmeet Bindra, Pawan Kumar, Sr. V.P.(Litigation), Punit Babbar, Sr. Manager, (Litigation), Advocates. For the Respondents: ----



Judgment Text


This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner M/s. SBI Cards & Payments Services Ltd. against the order dated 26.08.2019 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UT Chandigarh, (in short ‘the State Commission’) passed in Appeal No.352 of 2018.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the Complainant/respondent No.1 was issued credit card by opposite party/petitioner herein. Complainant/respondent No.1 filed a complaint to opposite party for 8 transactions amounting to Rs.39,999/- done on 27.10.2017 which were executed without his knowledge. The complainant even filed a FIR for the same. Opposite party refused the claim & put the liability on him. Complainant approached Banking Ombudsman of RBI whose office after investigation advised opposite party to pay the amount in dispute to complainant. However, the amount was not paid. Complainant sent legal notice to opposite party as they failed to comply with the above directions. The complainant filed a consumer complaint being CC No.192 of 2018 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum UT Chandigarh, (in short the ‘District Forum’). District Forum passed the following order:-

“In view of the facts, as brought forth in the pleadings & evidence, as discussed in the preceding paragraphs, the complaint is hereby allowed against the OP No.4 with direction to reverse an amount of Rs.39,999/- in the credit card account of the complainant against the unauthorized transaction and also credit an amount of Rs.5000/- in the said account towards litigation expenses.

This Forum do not feel it expedient to award any compensation over and above the relief mentioned above.”

3. Aggrieved with the above order of the District Forum, the opposite party/petitioner herein filed an appeal before the State Commission, which was dismissed vide its order dated 26.08.2019.

4. Hence this revision petition.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at the admission stage. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that as soon as the complaint was received, the amount was remitted to the account of the petitioner. However, when detailed inquiry was conducted, it was found that in fact the complainant had transacted with the credit card or he must have shared his details of credit card along with mobile number as the OTP was sent to his mobile number registered with the petitioner. As the whole transaction is based on OTP, which is only received by the account holder on his mobile number, which is registered with the petitioner/opposite party, it is not possible that anybody could have used his credit card or could have got the OTP to transact with credit card. The complainant himself has mentioned in his complaint that his e-mail was hacked. As the OTP is being sent on mobile as well as on e-mail and if the e-mail of the complainant was hacked by somebody else, then, the third party could have got the OTP and could have known the details of the credit card to misuse the same. But in that case, the responsibility is not of the petitioner to stop the withdrawal of the amount withdrawn. The RBI guidelines also state that if there is any fault or negligence on the part of the complainant/card holder, then the bank would not be liable to pay any amount. In the present case, clearly e-mail was hacked and somebody got the OTP through the hacked e-mail and transacted with the credit card. In such situation, the complainant is himself responsible because his e-mail was hacked and he did not take precaution in this regard. Clearly the petitioner is not responsible in such case to refund the amount withdrawn. It was further argued that if a fraud has been played upon the complainant by hacking his e-mail by a third party, then why the bank should be responsible for the same. Moreover, the cases involving fraud, forgery, cheating etc. cannot be decided by consumer fora. In support of his contention the learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the judgment of this Commission in P.N. Khanna Vs. Bank of India & Anr., FA No.9 of 2015, decided on 29.01.2015 (NC) where it has been observed that:

“6. Learned State Commission rightly observed as under:-

In Bright Transport Company Vs. Sangli Sahakari Bank Ltd., II (2012) CPJ 151 (NC), it was held by the National Commission that the complaints which are based on the allegations of fraud, forgery, etc. and trial of which would require the leading of voluminous evidence and consideration thereof cannot be entertained by the Consumer Fora. In Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Munimahesh Patel 2006 (2) CPC 668 (SC), decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court; Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., I (1998) CPJ 13, a case decided by a four Member Bench of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi and M/s. Singhal Swaroop Ispat Ltd. Vs. United Commercial Bank III (1992) CPJ 50, a case decided by a three member Bench of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi it was held that when there are allegations of forgery, fraud and cheating, adjudication whereof, requires elaborate evidence, the same cannot be decided, by a Consumer Fora, proceedings before which, are summary in nature.”

6. I have carefully considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and examined the record. First of all, it is seen that both the fora below have given concurrent finding of facts and have allowed the payment of Rs.39,999/- to the complainant. The facts have already been assessed by the fora below and this Commission cannot reassess the facts in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mrs. Rubi (Chandra) Dutta vs. United India Insurance Company, 2011 (3) Scale 654, wherein the following has been held:-

“Also, it is to be noted that the revisional powers of the National Commission are derived from Section 21 (b) of the Act, under which the said power can be exercised only if there is some prima facie jurisdictional error appearing in the impugned order, and only then, may the same be set aside. In our considered opinion there was no jurisdictional error or miscarriage of justice, which could have warranted the National Commission to have taken a different view that what was taken by the two Forums. The decision of the National Commission rests not on the basis of some legal principle that was ignored by the Courts below, but on a different (and in our opinion, an erroneous) interpretation of the same set of facts. This is not the manner in which revisional powers should be invoked. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that that the jurisdiction conferred on the National Commission under Section 21(b) of the Act has been transgressed. It was not a case where such a view could have been taken, by setting aside the concurrent finding of two fora.”

7. The fact of withdrawal of the amount of Rs.39,999/- has been challenged in the revision petition on which both the fora below have already given concurrent finding and the scope under these circumstances in the revision petition is quite limited. The amount involved is a small amount and this Commission would not like to interfere with the concurrent orders passed by the fora below. Accepting this revision petition will result in further litigation expenditure by both the parties which will not be in the interest of both the parties as the disputed amount is not much. This view is being taken in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gurgaon Gramin Bank Vs. Khazani & Anr., IV (2012) CPJ 5 (SC), wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has observed;

"2. Number of litigations in our country is on the rise, for small and trivial matters, people and sometimes Central and State Governments and their instrumentalities Banks, nationalized or private, come to courts may be due to ego clash or to save the Officers’ skin. Judicial system is over-burdened, naturally causes delay in adjudication of disputes. Mediation centers opened in various parts of our country have, to some extent, eased the burden of the courts but we are still in the tunnel and the light is far away. On more than one occasion, this court has reminded the Central Government, State Governments and other instrumentalities as well as to the various banking institutions to take earnest efforts to resolve the disputes at their end. At times, some give and take attitude should be adopted or both will sink. Unless, serious questions of law of general importance arise for consideration or a question which affects large number of persons or the stakes are very high, Courts jurisdiction cannot be invoked for resolution of small and trivial matters. We are really disturbed by the manner in which those types of matters are being brought to courts even at the level of Supreme Court of India and this case falls in that category.”

The Apex Court further held;

“10. The Chief Manager stated in the affidavit that no bill was raised by the counsel for the bank for conducting the matter before the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission. We have not been told how much money has been spent by the bank officers for their to and fro journeys to the lawyers’ office, to the District Forum, State Forum, National Commission and, to the Supreme Court. For a paltry amount of Rs.15,000/-even according to the affidavit, bank has already spent a total amount of Rs.12,950/- leaving aside the time spent and other miscellaneous expenses spent by the officers of the bank for to and fro expenses etc. Further, it may be noted that the District Forum had awarded Rs.3,000/-towards cost of litigation and compensation for the harassment caused to Smt. Khazani. Adding this amount, the cost goes up to Rs.15,950/-. Remember, the buffalo had died 10 years back, but the litigation is not over, fight is still on for Rs.15,000/-.

11. Learned counsel appearing for the bank, Shri Amit Grover, submitted that though the amount involved is not very high but the claim was fake and on inspection by the insurance company, no tag was found on the dead body of the buffalo and hence the insurer was not bound to make good the loss, consequently the bank had to proceed against Smt. Khazani.

12. We are of the view that issues raised before us are purely questions of facts examined by the three forums including the National Disputes Redressal Commission and we fail to see what is the important question of law to be decided by the Supreme Court. In our view, these types of litigation should be discouraged and message should also go, otherwise for all trivial and silly matters people will rush to this court.

13. Gramin Bank like the appellant should stand for the benefit of the gramins who sometimes avail of loan for buying buffaloes, to purchase agricultural implements, manure, seeds and so on. Repayment, to a large extent, depends upon the income which they get out of that. Crop failure, due to drought or natural calamities, disease to cattle or their death may cause difficulties to gramins to repay the amount. Rather than coming to their rescue, banks often drive them to litigation leading them extreme penury. Assuming that the bank is right, but once an authority like District Forum takes a view, the bank should graciously accept it rather than going in for further litigation and even to the level of Supreme Court. Driving poor gramins to various litigative forums should be strongly deprecated because they have also to spend large amounts for conducting litigation. We condemn this type of practice, unless the stake is very high or the matter affects large number of persons or affects a general policy of the Bank which has far reaching consequences.
<

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

br />14. We, in this case, find no error in the decisions taken by all fact finding authorities including the National Disputes Redressal Commission. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the bank to the first respondent within a period of one month. Resultantly, the Bank now has to spend altogether Rs.25,950/- for a claim of Rs.15,000/-, apart from to and fro travelling expenses of the Bank officials. Let God save the Gramins.” 8. The only legal point raised by the petitioner is that a consumer forum cannot decide a complaint involving fraud, forgery or cheating. In the present case, as the e-mail of the complainant was hacked by a third party, clearly, no fraud, forgery or cheating has been committed by either of the parties in the complaint case. The circular dated 06.07.2017 of the RBI also supports the case of the complainant, therefore, in my opinion, the judgment of this Commission in P.N. Khanna Vs. Bank of India & Anr. (supra) would not be attracted in the present case. 9. Based on the above discussion, I do not find any force in the present revision petition and this Commission would refrain from interfering with the concurrent orders passed by the fora below. Consequently, revision petition no.2098 of 2019 is dismissed in limine.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

06-10-2020 Rikhab Jain Versus M/S. Trackon Couriers Private Limited, New Delhi &amp; Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
05-10-2020 Tarun Kanti Chowdhury &amp; Others Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi &amp; Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
01-10-2020 M. Meenachi Muppidathi Versus The Government of India, Representing by The Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi &amp; Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
01-10-2020 M. Meenachi Muppidathi Versus The Government of India, Representing by The Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi &amp; Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
01-10-2020 Construction Industry Development Council, New Delhi Versus Arjun Singh &amp; Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
01-10-2020 M/s. Harihar Buildspace Pvt. Ltd. G-III, Amar Palace, Panchsheel Square, Dhantoli, Nagpur Versus Union of India Through its Chief Secretary, Ministry of Power, Shramshakti Bhavan, New Delhi &amp; Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
30-09-2020 Lalatendu Nayak &amp; Another Versus Supertech Ltd., New Delhi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-09-2020 Pavai Varam Educational Trust, Established &amp; Namakkal Represented by Chairman, V. Natarajan Versus The Pharmacy Council of India, Represented by the Secretary Cum Registrar, New Delhi High Court of Judicature at Madras
30-09-2020 M/s. Taneja Developers &amp; Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi Versus Col. B.S. Goraya National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-09-2020 Rhonpal Biotech Pvt. Ltd. Versus New Delhi Municipal Council &amp; Others High Court of Delhi
23-09-2020 C.M. Gadha &amp; Another Versus Bar Council of India, New Delhi, Rep. by Its Secretary &amp; Others High Court of Kerala
23-09-2020 The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Medical Services Corporation Ltd., Chennai &amp; Others Versus M/s. Jackson Laboratories Private Limited., Represented by its Managing Director Jugal Kishore, Chennai &amp; Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-09-2020 Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus M/s. Guptasons Jewellers &amp; Gems Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-09-2020 Tvl. Transtonnelstroy Afcons Joint Venture, Represented by its Authorised Signatory, Chennai Versus Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-09-2020 Advocate Thoufeek Ahamed Versus Union of India, Represented by Secretary (Justice), Ministry of Law &amp; Justice, New Delhi &amp; Another High Court of Kerala
15-09-2020 United India Insurance Company Ltd., Through The Regional Manager, New Delhi Versus Dinesh Vijay National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
14-09-2020 Dr. Varghese Perayil Versus The Election Commission of India, New Delhi, Rep. by Its Secretary &amp; Others High Court of Kerala
14-09-2020 Tuticorin Stevedores' Association, Rep.by its Secretary, Tuticorin Versus The Government of India, Rep.by its Secretary, Ministry of Shipping, New Delhi &amp; Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
14-09-2020 M/s Indian Electrical Services Versus The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Building Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
10-09-2020 Raina Begum Versus The Union of India Rep. By The Comm &amp; Secy. to The Govt. of India, Home Deptt., New Delhi-01, India &amp; Others High Court of Gauhati
09-09-2020 Oriental College of Teacher Education, Represented by Its Manager, Calicut Versus The Regional Director, National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi High Court of Kerala
08-09-2020 S. Jagannatha Rao Versus Air India Limited, Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-09-2020 The Dental Council of India, Aiwan-E-Galib Marg, New Delhi Versus PSR Lakhmi Bhuvaneshwari Preethi &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-09-2020 Badri Narayan Singh &amp; Another Versus The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Government of India, through the Home Secretary North Block, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
03-09-2020 B. Rajesh &amp; Another Versus Union of India, Rep. by its Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-09-2020 Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Rep. by its Member Secretary, Chennai. Another Versus S. Manikandan High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-09-2020 Hyundai Motor India Ltd., New Delhi Versus Harshad Ramji Chauhan &amp; Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
01-09-2020 Pavai Varam Educational Trust Established and Administering, Paavai College of Pharmacy and Research, Rep. by Chairman V. Natarajan Versus The Pharmacy Council of India, Represented by the Secretary cum Registrar, New Delhi High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-08-2020 M/s. Omaxe Limited, New Delhi &amp; Another Versus Divya Karun &amp; Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
28-08-2020 M/s Urban Systems Versus The Union of India Rep. By The Secretary To The Govt of India, Min of Finance, Deptt of Revenue Central Board of Indirect Taxes And Customs, North Block, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Gauhati
28-08-2020 Dr. Samjaison Versus The Deputy Director of Health Services, Ramanathapuram &amp; Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
26-08-2020 Davinder Nath Sethi &amp; Another Versus M/s. Purearth Infrastructure Limited, New Delhi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
26-08-2020 Karvy Stock Broking Limited, Represented by its Vicepresident (Legal) Ch. Viswanath Versus The Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
26-08-2020 New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Delhi Versus Maninderjeet Singh Khera National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
26-08-2020 Mansingh Yadav Versus Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Services Corporation Limited Through Its Managing Director, District Raipur Chhattisgarh &amp; Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
26-08-2020 T.S. Abinesh &amp; Another Versus The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus, Egmore, Chennai Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
26-08-2020 Greencrest Financial Services Limited Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India, SEBI Bhavan SEBI Securities amp Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
24-08-2020 R.K. Dawra Versus Union of India, Through Secretary Ministry of Communication, Department of Telecommunication, New Delhi &amp; Others Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
24-08-2020 Sanjay Nayyar Versus State of NCT Delhi, New Delhi &amp; Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-08-2020 Vishal Keshari Versus State of U.P. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
24-08-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus Singhla Engineers &amp; Contractors Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-08-2020 Dr. Parimal Roy, Working as Director, Indian Council of Agricultural Research NIVEDI Versus The President, Indian Council of Agricultural Research Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi &amp; Others Central Administrative Tribunal Bangalore Bench
21-08-2020 Pankaj Chaudhary, HCS, Special Secretary, Public Health Engineer Department Versus Union of India, through its Secretary, Department of Personnel &amp; Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances &amp; Pensions, New Delhi &amp; Others Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
19-08-2020 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-3, Chennai Versus Visual Graphics Computing Services India Private Limited, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-08-2020 V.K. Somarajan Pillai Versus Union of India, Represented by the Secretary to Govt. of India, Department of Posts, New Delhi &amp; Others Central Administrative Tribunal Ernakulam Bench
19-08-2020 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi Versus Adv. Shiji Joseph &amp; Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
18-08-2020 The Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad Versus The Union of India, The Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi &amp; Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
18-08-2020 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus Astha Cement Pvt. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
17-08-2020 Welworth Software Private Limited Versus Sun Distribution Services Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Another. High Court of Delhi
17-08-2020 Hariom Project Private Limited Versus Military Engineer Services, Director Of Contract Management And Ors. High Court of Delhi
17-08-2020 New India Assurance Company Ltd., New Delhi Versus Shailendra Prasad Singh National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
14-08-2020 Kasmikoya Biyyammabiyoda &amp; Others Versus Union of India, Represented by Home Secretary, Secretariat, Government of India, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Kerala
13-08-2020 Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd, New Delhi &amp; Another Versus State of Bihar &amp; Another High Court of Judicature at Patna
12-08-2020 Abdul Saleem Pattakal &amp; Another Versus The Director General Bureau of Civil Aviation Security, A-Wing, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Kerala
12-08-2020 Scott Christian College, Rep.by its Correspondent S. Byju Nizeth Paaul Versus The Member Secretary, All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi &amp; Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-08-2020 Surender Singh Dahiya, Additional Director, Agriculture Department, Government of Haryana (Panchkula) Versus Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances &amp; Pensions, Department of Personnel &amp; Training, New Delhi &amp; Others Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
07-08-2020 M/s. B &amp; B Growing, New Delhi &amp; Another Versus Capital Co-Op. Group Housing Society Ltd., Delhi &amp; Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
07-08-2020 Citibank N.A., New Delhi Versus Deepanshu Kumar &amp; Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
07-08-2020 The Commissioner of Income Tax-V, New Delhi Versus M/s. Nalwa Investment Ltd. &amp; Others High Court of Delhi
06-08-2020 Peter &amp; Others Versus Union of India, Represented by Its Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest &amp; Climate Change, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Kerala
06-08-2020 Rajiv Bal Versus Harrison Industries, New Delhi &amp; Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
05-08-2020 M/s. Exl Careers &amp; Another Versus Frankfinn Aviation Services Private Limited Supreme Court of India
04-08-2020 P. Anil Kumar @ Chempazhanthi Anil &amp; Others Versus The Indian Red Cross Society, Represented by Its Secretary General, National IRCS, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Kerala
04-08-2020 Regional Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Ins. Co. Ltd., New Delhi &amp; Another Versus Capt. Bibhuti Mohan Jha National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
04-08-2020 M/s. Pioneer Power Ltd, Rep. by its Chief General Manager, Therkukattur Village, Ramanathapuram Versus Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary Ministry of Petroleum &amp; Natural Gas, New Delhi &amp; Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
04-08-2020 Union of India, Rep by its Secretary to the Government, Department of Home Affairs, New Delhi &amp; Others Versus Siva Lakshmi High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-07-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Rajesh Kumar Dy. Manager, New Delhi Versus Biking Food Products (P) Ltd., Telangana National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-07-2020 C.R. Mahesh Versus Union of India, Represented by The Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Kerala
30-07-2020 Som Nath Bhatt Versus Central Provident Fund Commissioner, New Delhi &amp; Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-07-2020 Som Nath Bhatt Versus Central Provident Fund Commissioner, New Delhi &amp; Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-07-2020 Jalgaon Golden Transport Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food &amp; Public Distribution, New Delhi &amp; Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
29-07-2020 Yogesh Suresh Chaudhari Versus M/S. Auto Wheels, Kubota Tractor Sales Services &amp; Spares, Maharashtra &amp; Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
28-07-2020 N. Madhavan Versus Union of India Rep. by its Secretary, Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-07-2020 Amar Chand Singh Versus C.B.I. Thru. Director, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
27-07-2020 Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Duly Constituted Attorney, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus Vikash Kumar National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-07-2020 National Insurance Company Limited Through Its Duly Constituted Attorney Manager, New Delhi Versus M/s. D.D Spinners Pvt. Ltd., Panipat National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-07-2020 A. Praveen Kumar Versus The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Egmore &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-07-2020 Hindustan Insecticides Ltd., Through Its Authorized Representative, New Delhi Versus Thakar &amp; Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
22-07-2020 Kabilan Manoharan Versus Union of India Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways Transport Bhavan, New Delhi, &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-07-2020 Director of Income Tax-II (International Taxation) New Delhi &amp; Another Versus M/s. Samsung Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. Supreme Court of India
22-07-2020 M/s. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. (Through Its Authorised Representative), New Delhi Versus Sukhmal Jain &amp; Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-07-2020 Maruti Suzuki India Limited, New Delhi Versus Mukesh Kumar &amp; Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-07-2020 Suganthi Versus The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Chennai &amp; Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
20-07-2020 M/s. SBI Cards &amp; Payments Services Pvt. Ltd., Haryana Versus Consumer Affairs &amp; Fair Business Practices, West Bengal National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-07-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through National Legal Vertical, New Delhi Versus M/s. Krishna Spico Industries Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad &amp; Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
17-07-2020 M/s. Arudra Engineering Private Limited, Represented by its Managing Director, R. Natraj Versus M/s. Pathanjali Ayurved Limited, Represented by its Director, New Delhi High Court of Judicature at Madras
16-07-2020 G. Suneetha Versus The Union of India, rep., by its Secretary, Ministry of Defense, New Delhi &amp; Another High Court of for the State of Telangana
14-07-2020 M/s. Ruchi Soya Industries Limited, Rep. by its Authorised representative Goregaon Mumbai Versus Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-07-2020 M/s. P.R. Mani Electronics Rep. by its Proprietor, Thiruvannamalai Versus Union of India Rep. by Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-07-2020 Life Insurance Corporation of India Through Its Additional Secretary (Legal), New Delhi Versus Anil Laxman Matade National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
09-07-2020 Khem Raj Verma &amp; Others Versus Union of India, through Ministry of Human Resource &amp; Development, Department of Higher Education, New Delhi &amp; Another Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
09-07-2020 Ravindra Versus Union of India, through its Under Secretary, General Administration Department, New Delhi &amp; Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
09-07-2020 Abdul Wahid Bhat Versus Union of India, through Defence Secretary, New Delhi &amp; Others Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
08-07-2020 Velankani Information Systems Limited, Represented by its Manging Director, Kiron D. Shah Versus Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs Government of India, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Karnataka
07-07-2020 Rajesh Kumar Versus Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Communication, New Delhi &amp; Others Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
03-07-2020 Bar Council of India, New Delhi, Represented by Its Secretary Versus Lokanath Behera Ips, Director, Vigilance &amp; Anti Corruption Bureau, Thiruvananthapuram &amp; Others High Court of Kerala
02-07-2020 BSA Citi Courier Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Goods &amp; Services Tax Delhi West &amp; Another High Court of Delhi
01-07-2020 Sony India Pvt. Ltd. Mohan Co Operative Industrial Estate, New Delhi &amp; Others Versus Jose George Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
01-07-2020 Seema Shukla Versus New Delhi Municipal Corporation &amp; Another High Court of Delhi
30-06-2020 Dr. P.S. Sandeep &amp; Others Versus The Government of India, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi &amp; Others High Court of Judicature at Madras