Aligarh Consumer Court Orders Compensation and Payment Ruling Against Insurance Company for Denying Treatment Coverage

The woman got her insurance through HDFC Health Agro Insurance and Tata AIG General Insurance. When he fell ill, he was admitted to Delhi Metro Hospital. The treatment cost Rs 3 lakh 31 thousand 247. When the insurance company refused to give, an application was filed in the consumer court.

Aligarh District Consumer Court has passed an order against the insurance company for not paying the bill for the treatment of the disease even after having insurance cover. On the victim's application, it has been clearly stated that the company will pay the bill. Along with this, a compensation of Rs 40 thousand has also been imposed. This decision has been given by the court of District Consumer Court Chairman Justice Hasnain Qureshi, members Alok Upadhyay and Purnima Singh.

The application was filed on behalf of Manju Mittal, a resident of Chandra Cinema Dubey Padav. It was told that he got his insurance through HDFC Health Agro Insurance and Tata AIG General Insurance. The insurance taken from 8 February 2019 was valid till 7 February 2023. During this time, on 5 February 2022, he fell ill and was admitted to Delhi Metro Hospital. During this period, heart related disease was reported. She remained admitted till the month of May and underwent treatment.

During this period, Rs 3 lakh 31 thousand 247 were paid. But the insurance company refused to pay it. It was argued that the disease was hidden from your level while getting the insurance. An application was filed against the insurance company regarding this. While hearing the matter, the Consumer Court has fixed Rs 40,000 as compensation and payment of the treatment expenses.

If you are looking for a solution to Insurance complaints, File a Complaint at Voxya, India's trusted platform for resolving consumer complaints.

It helps consumers to get a replacement, refund, and compensation quickly.

Trusted by 2 Lac+ consumers.

Aligarh Consumer Court Case: Bill of Rs 11669 handed over without water connection, Consumer Court rejected the bill in its order.

Aligarh Municipal Corporation sent a bill of thousands to Mahendra Nagar Hanumanpuri of Aligarh without water connection. The matter was taken to the consumer forum court. The bill was rejected in the forum.

In a case related to water price bill in Mahendra Nagar Hanumanpuri area of Aligarh, the Consumer Forum court has ordered to cancel the bill. This order has been given in the petition filed against the Municipal Commissioner and GM Water in the case of sending bills without water connection. The order has been pronounced jointly by the bench of District Consumer Court Chairman Justice Hasnain Qureshi, member Alok Upadhyay and Purnima Singh.

This petition was filed on behalf of Shankarlal of Mahendra Nagar Hanumanpuri. In which it was said that there is no water connection here since 2014 and no pipeline has been laid for drinking water supply in the area. Despite this, a bill of Rs 11669 was sent to his house from the Municipal Corporation level. In this case, Municipal Commissioner and GM Water were made accused and a request was made to cancel the bill and pay compensation etc.

It was argued on behalf of the Municipal Corporation that there was a connection at Shankarlal's place, the bill for the same has been sent. On this, evidence was presented on behalf of Shankar Lal that during the construction of the road in 2014, the connection was cut and the laid pipeline was uprooted. After this there is no connection and no pipeline is in the area. Considering this as the basis, the court has ordered to repeal the bill. Also warned that if the order is not followed, a case will be registered.

If you are facing any dispute related to a consumer complaint, File a complaint at Voxya, India's trusted platform for resolving consumer complaints. It helps consumers to get a replacement, refunded, and compensation quickly with an optimal solution.

Trusted by 2 Lac+ consumers.

मुंबई उपभोक्ता अदालत ने ग्रोफ़र्स को एक ग्राहक को 8000 रुपये का भुगतान करने का आदेश दिया (Mumbai Consumer Court orders Grofers to pay Rs 8000 to a customer)

ई-कॉमर्स प्लेटफॉर्म Flipkartके बाद, ऑनलाइन किराना सेवा प्लेटफॉर्म (online grocery services platform) Grofers मुश्किल में आ गया है। Mumbai की निवासी कल्पना शाह ने Grofers से 8,000 रुपये का मुआवजा जीता |

कहानी जनवरी 2020 की है। शाह ने तरबूज के बीज का ऑर्डर दिया था जो डिलीवर नहीं हुआ। जब उसने Grofers की Customer Care Team से संपर्क किया, तो उसे बताया गया कि रिकॉर्ड के अनुसार, सभी सामान वितरित कर दिए गए थे |

इसके बाद शाह ने एक Agency से संपर्क किया, जिसने कहा कि वह या तो तत्काल रिफंड प्राप्त कर सकती है या अपने ऑर्डर को प्राप्त करने के लिए दो सप्ताह तक इंतजार कर सकती है | उसने पहले वाला विकल्प चुना लेकिन साइबर धोखाधड़ी का शिकार हो गई जहां उसे वन-टाइम पासवर्ड साझा करने के लिए कहा गया। जिससे उसे 5,000 रुपये का नुकसान हुआ |

फिर, शाह ने 2022 में Mumbai Consumer Court से संपर्क किया, जिसने हाल ही में एक आदेश पारित किया कि Grofers 9% ब्याज दर पर राशि का भुगतान करें।

Mumbai Consumer Court ने कहा कि Grofers को शाह और को मानसिक पीड़ा पहुंचाने के लिए 5,000 रुपये का भुगतान करना होगा | 

अगर आपकी भी किसी भी प्रकार की उपभोक्ता शिकायत (consumer complaint) है तो उसके समाधान के लिए दिए गए लिंक पर क्लिक करे:- File a Complaint Now!

Hotel Held Liable for Service Deficiency: Bangalore Consumer Court Ordered Chicken Biryani Served Without Chicken

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Bangalore (Urban) recently ruled against a hotel for failing to deliver the expected service, serving Chicken Biryani devoid of any chicken pieces to a customer.

Customer's Plight and Bangalore Consumer Court's Decision

Presided over by President M. Shobha P, the Bangalore consumer court partly upheld the complaint, instructing the hotel owner to refund Rs 150, the amount paid for the Chicken Biryani, and additionally pay Rs. 1,000 as compensation within 30 days of the order.

Chronicle of Events

The complainant detailed visiting the hotel with their spouse to procure a dinner parcel due to a lack of a gas cylinder at home. They asserted having paid Rs. 150 for Chicken Biryani, having received a receipt for the same.

Upon returning home, it was discovered that the ordered biryani only contained rice, devoid of any chicken portions.

Unfulfilled Remedial Actions

Upon immediately contacting the hotel, the complainant was assured by the Opposite Party (OP) that another box of Chicken Biryani would be dispatched within 30 minutes. However, this assurance was unfulfilled.

Lacking alternatives at such a late hour, the customer and their spouse consumed the available biryani rice, despite intimating the hotel. The failure of the hotel to fulfill its commitment led to both a service deficiency and mental distress for the complainant.

Legal Proceedings and Commission's Verdict

Subsequently, the complainant served a notice to the hotel on 28.04.2023, receiving no response. Consequently, they sought redressal from the commission, demanding Rs. 30,000 as costs and a refund of the purchase price.

After reviewing the evidence, the Bangalore Consumer Court concluded that receiving payment for rice instead of Chicken Biryani was unjust and unacceptable. 

Had the hotel acted genuinely upon realizing the mistake, they could have rectified the error by delivering the Chicken Biryani. However, the opposite party failed to do so, underscoring their lack of commitment to customer satisfaction.

Bangalore Consumer Court Ruling

Partially in favor of the complainant, the Bangalore Consumer Court ordered the payment of Rs. 1,000 in compensation, alongside a refund for the biryani. It acknowledged the mental distress caused to the complainant and their spouse due to the inconvenience of preparing a meal without a gas cylinder at home, exacerbated by the hotel's failure to rectify the situation.

If you are also looking for a solution to the consumer complaint, File a Complaint Now!

Kerala Consumer Forum directed the two-wheeler dealer to pay ₹1 lakh to the motorcycle owner (केरल उपभोक्ता फोरम ने दोपहिया डीलर को मोटरसाइकिल मालिक को ₹1 लाख का भुगतान करने का निर्देश दिया)

Angamaly में एक two-wheeler showroom के dealer को Ernakulam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission द्वारा उस व्यक्ति को मुआवजे के रूप में ₹1 लाख से अधिक का भुगतान करने का निर्देश दिया गया है, जिसने शिकायत की थी कि पुराने मॉडल का दोपहिया वाहन देकर उसे धोखा दिया गया था |

यह मामला शिकायतकर्ता Nedumbassery  के मूल निवासी अरविंद जी. जॉन को Honda Unicorn bike की डिलीवरी से संबंधित है | यह पाया गया कि जिस वाहन को फरवरी 2018 में बुक किया गया था और उसी वर्ष मार्च में Arya Bhangy Motors द्वारा दिया गया था, जिसका निर्माण 2017 में किया गया था और उसके पंजीकरण प्रमाणपत्र पर भी वही (वर्ष 2017) अंकित किया गया था | मिस्टर जॉन ने 2018 मॉडल के वाहन के लिए बुकिंग की थी और उसका भुगतान किया था |

Commission के पीठासीन अधिकारी डी.बी. बीनू और सदस्य वैकोम रामचन्द्रन और टी.एन. श्रीविद्या ने पाया कि यह अनैतिक और सेवा में कमी थी |  इसलिए, उन्होंने dealer को श्री जॉन को वाहन लौटाने पर उसकी लागत के रूप में ₹85,660 का भुगतान करने का आदेश दिया, और मुकदमेबाजी लागत के रूप में 30 दिनों के भीतर 9% ब्याज दर के साथ ₹20,000 का भुगतान करने का आदेश दिया |

अगर आपकी भी किसी भी प्रकार की उपभोक्ता शिकायत (consumer complaint) है तो उसके समाधान के लिए दिए गए लिंक पर क्लिक करे:- File a Complaint Now!