{"id":203356,"date":"2018-10-09T15:45:34","date_gmt":"2018-10-09T10:15:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=203356"},"modified":"2018-12-14T18:14:50","modified_gmt":"2018-12-14T12:44:50","slug":"consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","title":{"rendered":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to attempt wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC)<\/strong>: A Division Bench of S.M. Kantikar, Presiding Member and Dinesh Singh, Member, dismissed an appeal with costs filed against the order of State Commission whereby his claim for deficiency of services, against the respondents, was rejected.<\/p>\n

The appellant had purchased a postpaid internet connection from the respondent company for a sum of Rs 5500. As per the appellant\u2019s story, the internet connection was activated and he used the internet services for a period of 2 days after which the services were discontinued by the respondent company without any intimation. However, refuting the claim of the appellant, the respondent asserted that in the absence of a valid proof of residence, the internet services were never activated for the appellant.<\/p>\n

The main question that arose before the Commission was whether the respondent company was liable for deficiency in services under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<\/p>\n

The Commission observed that the appellant had purchased the connection for Rs 5500 and the amount claimed by him in the form of compensation was highly disproportionate i.e. Rs 99,95,500. Further, the Commission observed that the appellant had previously filed a similar complaint against Tata Teleservices Ltd. which was found to be frivolous and vexatious, for which a cost of Rs 10,000 was imposed on the appellant. The Court observed that the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to attempt wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019.<\/p>\n

The Commission held that the appellant had filed a frivolous case against the respondent company and that he was attempting to misuse the statutory processes provided for better protection of the interest of consumers to attempt wrong gains and to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019. Hence, the Commission dismissed the appeal and a cost of Rs 500 was imposed on the appellant for filing a frivolous case and abusing the process of law. [Uttamkumar Samanta v. Vodafone East Ltd., First Appeal No. 847 of 2017, order dated 05-08-2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Division Bench of S.M. Kantikar, Presiding Member and Dinesh Singh, Member, dismissed an appeal with <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":199533,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[31597,32034,31599],"class_list":["post-203356","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-consumer-protection-act-1986","tag-deficiency-of-services","tag-nuisance-value"],"yoast_head":"\nConsumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to attempt wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to attempt wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Division Bench of S.M. Kantikar, Presiding Member and Dinesh Singh, Member, dismissed an appeal with\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-10-09T10:15:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-14T12:44:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/\",\"name\":\"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to attempt wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-10-09T10:15:34+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-14T12:44:50+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887,\"caption\":\"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to attempt wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to attempt wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to attempt wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019","og_description":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Division Bench of S.M. Kantikar, Presiding Member and Dinesh Singh, Member, dismissed an appeal with","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-10-09T10:15:34+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-14T12:44:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","name":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to attempt wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg","datePublished":"2018-10-09T10:15:34+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-14T12:44:50+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg","width":1330,"height":887,"caption":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to attempt wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":200627,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","url_meta":{"origin":203356,"position":0},"title":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to obtain wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 25, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Division Bench of Dr S.M. Kantikar and Dinesh Singh, Members, dismissed a revision petition filed against the order of the State Commission. The petitioners, in this case, had purchased a car in the name of their company Harmony Colonizers (P) Ltd. from respondent\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":214871,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/20\/hp-scdrc-no-bar-under-consumer-protection-act-prohibiting-filing-of-consumer-complaint-in-the-presence-of-an-alternative-remedy\/","url_meta":{"origin":203356,"position":1},"title":"HP SCDRC | No bar under Consumer Protection Act prohibiting filing of consumer complaint in the presence of an alternative remedy","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 20, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Shimla: Coram of Justice P.S. Rana (President), Vijay Pal Khachi (Member) and Sunita Sharma (Member), dismissed the appeal filed by Bharti Airtel Ltd. against the order of the District Forum whereby Bharti Airtel was directed to pay punitive compensation to one of its\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/HP-STATE-CONSUMER-DISPUTES-COMMISSION.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/HP-STATE-CONSUMER-DISPUTES-COMMISSION.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/HP-STATE-CONSUMER-DISPUTES-COMMISSION.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/HP-STATE-CONSUMER-DISPUTES-COMMISSION.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/HP-STATE-CONSUMER-DISPUTES-COMMISSION.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":288106,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/29\/consumer-commission-cannot-decide-disputed-questions-of-fact-supreme-court-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":203356,"position":2},"title":"Complaints with \u2018highly disputed questions of facts\u2019 cannot be decided by Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission\/Forum: Supreme Court","author":"Ridhi","date":"March 29, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court quashed the original complaint and said that respondent miserably failed to discharge his burden to prove deficiency in service on part of the bank.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Consumer Commission","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-909.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-909.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-909.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-909.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":244408,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/25\/educational-institutions\/","url_meta":{"origin":203356,"position":3},"title":"NCDRC | Whether educational institutions and co-curricular activities such as swimming provided by them will be covered under Consumer Protection Act? Read on","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 25, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): C. Viswanath (Presiding Member) addressed the issue of whether educational institutions fall under the ambit of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The instant appeal was filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Order of Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":277719,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/18\/supreme-court-set-aside-the-order-of-ncdrc-reducing-lakhs-of-compensation-granted-by-the-state-commission-to-rupees-10000-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":203356,"position":4},"title":"Supreme Court sets aside NCDRC’s judgment reducing almost Rs. 14 Lakhs of compensation granted by State Commission to Rs. 10,000","author":"Editor","date":"November 18, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Supreme Court: In an appeal filed against the judgment passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (\u2018NCDRC\u2019), wherein the amount of compensation has reduced to Rs. 10,000\/- as against the amount of Rs. 13,79,901\/- granted by the State Commission to be paid to the appellant, division bench\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image21-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image21-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image21-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image21-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image21-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":206379,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/12\/07\/cases-of-carriage-by-air-question-of-limitation-should-be-decided-in-accordance-with-carriage-by-air-act-1972\/","url_meta":{"origin":203356,"position":5},"title":"Cases of carriage by air — question of limitation should be decided in accordance with Carriage By Air Act, 1972","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 7, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Division Member Bench of Dr S.M. Kantikar, Presiding Member, Dinesh Singh, Member, dismissed a revision petition filed against the order of the State Commission, whereby the petitioner was ordered to pay compensation to the respondent for deficiency in services. The main issue that\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/203356","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=203356"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/203356\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/199533"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=203356"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=203356"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=203356"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}