#consumer dispute

The Delhi State Consumer Commission upheld a ₹2.7 lakh health insurance claim, holding that a mere history of diabetes and cerebrovascular accident - without recent hospitalisation proximate to policy inception - cannot trigger the pre-existing disease exclusion. The insurer bears the burden of proving the policyholder's knowing concealment, and failure to physically supply policy terms and conditions constitutes a deficiency in service.

The commission ordered the hotel to refund the consumer’s Rs 16.12 lakh advance, plus interest, compensation and costs, because the promised postponement could not override the contract’s cancellation clause. This ruling reinforces that any advance must be returned when the agreed service is not performed, safeguarding consumers in hotel and event bookings.

The NCDRC held that the master group personal accident policy, which ceased in August 2008 with no premiums paid thereafter, could not be invoked for a 2010 accident. Consequently, the insurer was relieved of liability, underscoring that policy termination extinguishes coverage for future claims. This ruling affects all holders of terminated group policies and insurers facing post-termination claims.

The NCDRC ruled that a discharge voucher signed under financial duress cannot extinguish a policyholder’s right to claim, and affirmed the insurer’s valuation of obsolete stock as permissible under the Insurance Act, protecting claimants from unwarranted claim denials.

A purchaser who buys a shop room to run a self-employed business is deemed a consumer under Section 2(7) of the CPA 2019. This extends consumer-protection rights to small traders seeking livelihood premises, binding sellers to the Act.

The NCDRC ruled that the insurer, not the claimant, must establish that a pre-existing disease was concealed when the policy was taken. This shifts the evidential burden onto insurers in death-claim disputes, safeguarding policyholders from arbitrary refusals.

SCDRC Maharashtra condoned a 530-day delay in filing a consumer appeal, holding that delayed notice of an ex-parte order and subsequent legal consultation constitute 'sufficient cause' under Section 41. The ruling underscores the Commission's liberal approach to delay condonation where procedural lapses by the opposite party contribute to the delay.

Bombay High Court rules that electricity tariff classification depends on the actual usage of power, not the date of inspection. Utilities can recover differential charges retrospectively if the consumption was chargeable under the applicable tariff at the time, impacting industrial and commercial consumers facing reclassification disputes.

The Uttarakhand High Court ruled that mere allegations of expired cement supply-without evidence of a pre-existing agreement or fraudulent intent-do not constitute criminal conspiracy under Section 120-B IPC. The court emphasized that such disputes remain civil in nature, shielding corporations from unwarranted criminal prosecution where contractual breaches lack criminal mens rea.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that attaching an entire housing project and freezing all bank accounts in consumer execution proceedings is disproportionate. The court mandated phased payment of 50% of the principal within four months and ordered immediate release of excess assets, reinforcing proportionality as a key principle in enforcement under the Consumer Protection Act 2019.