Q: Write about the citation of Solidaire India Ltd. & Another v/s K. Indira ?

Ans: Solidaire India Ltd. & Another v/s K. Indira
    Appeal No. 358 of 1992
    Decided On, 28 December 1993

At, Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram.

In this case, a television set was bought and was serviced. Just after one week, the television stopped functioning and throughout a period, 11 repairs had to be done. This was considered as a deficiency of service and hence the consumer could claim compensation as per judgment of Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Q: Elucidate the citation of C.N.Anantharam vs M/S Fiat India Ltd.& Ors.Etc.Etc on 24 November, 2010 ?

Ans:  C.N.Anantharam vs M/S Fiat India Ltd.& Ors.Etc.Etc on 24 November, 2010 The honourable Supreme Court held that it appears that apart from the complaint relating to noise from the engine and the gear box, there was no other major defect which made the vehicle incapable of operation, particularly when the engine was replaced with a new one. However, in addition to the directions given by the National Commission, the honourable Supreme Court directs that if the independent technical expert is of the opinion that there are inherent manufacturing defects in the vehicle, the petitioner will be entitled to refund of the price of the vehicle and the lifetime tax and EMI along with interest @ 12% per annum and costs, as directed by the State Commission .
Read more

Q: Describe the citation of Avinash Yadav v. Wonderchef, 2019 ?

 Ans:  Avinash Yadav v. Wonderchef District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Aug 1, 2019 The honourable court held that this complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties jointly or severally to either replace the defective product i.e. gas chullah in question with a new one or to refund its price subject to the return of the defective product in question by the complainant, within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The complainant is also permitted compensation alongwith litigation expenses of Rs. 5500/- against the opposite parties. Ordered accordingly. Announced 01.08.2019. x
Read more

Q: Delineate the citation of Ashoke Khan V. Abdul Karim , 2005 ?

Ans:  Ashoke Khan v. Abdul Karim Allahabad High Court Aug 30, 2005 The Allahabad High Court further, considering the provisions of Section 226 of the Contract Act, it cannot be said that agent or dealer is not jointly and severally liable for the defects in the ‘power tiller’, as the contract is through the dealer. Therefore, privity of contract is with him. It is true that normally such liability with regard to the manufacturing defects is to be borne by the manufacturer. But, that would not mean that the dealer is absolved from joint and several liability. As held in the aforesaid case, the District Forum shall ensure execution expeditiously and immediately, if necessary, by making the petitioner to pay initially and, then, it will be for the petitioner to claim reimbursement from the manufacturer (Respondent No. 2). In the result, the Revision Petition is dismissed. 
Read more