INDER JIT SINGH, SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Sheela Meghwal – Respondent
ORDER
Inder Jit Singh, Presiding Member.—The present Revision Petitions (RP) have been filed by the Petitioner against Respondent as detailed above, under Section 58(1)(b) of Consumer Protection Act 2019, against the common order dated 03.04.2024 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Circuit Bench, Kota, Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’), in First Appeal (FA) Nos.29 and 30 of 2022 in which order dated 13.01.2022 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bundi (hereinafter referred to as District Commission) in Consumer Complaint (CC) No. 267 and 268 of 2019 was challenged, inter alia praying for setting aside the order dated 03.04.2024 of the State Commission.
2. While the Revision Petitioner (hereinafter also referred to as OP) was Appellant before the State Commission and OP before the District Forum, Respondent (hereinafter also referred to as Complainant) was Respondent before the State Commission and Complainant before the District Forum
3. Notice was issued to the Respondent on 18.10.2024. Parties filed Written Arguments/Synopsis on 30.08.2025 (Petitioner) and 17.09.2025 (respondent) respectively.
4. The Complainant filed two Co
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. M/s Harchand Rai Chandran
Suraj Mal Ram Niwas Oil Mills (P) Ltd. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Garg Sons International
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Parvesh Chander Chadha
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jhuma Saha
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sony Cheriyan
General Assurance Society Ltd. v. Chandumull Jain
Vikram Greentech (I) Ltd. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Alka Ojha v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission
Ruby (Chandra) Dutta v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Lourdes Society Snehanjali Girls Hostel and Another v. H & R Johnson (India) Limited and Ors.
T. Ramalingeswara Rao (Dead) Through Legal Representatives and Anr. v. N. Madhava Rao and Ors.
Rajiv Shukla v. Gold Rush Sales and Services Limited and Anr.
Learner License is a valid driving licence.
Burden of Proof – The court cannot lay down any criteria as to how said burden would be discharged, inasmuch as the same would depend upon the facts and circumstance of each case.
Revision cannot be maintained under Article 227 when an alternative remedy via appeal exists under the Consumer Protection Act.
(1) Limited Scope of Revisional Jurisdiction – The NCDRC, under Section 21(b) of the 1986 Act (pari materia to Section 58(1)(b) of the 2019 Act), cannot act as a second court of appeal. It cannot int....
(1) National Commission cannot interfere with pure finding of fact arrived at by District and State Commissions while exercising revisional jurisdiction.(2) Delay may be condoned if it is properly ex....
(1) Sanctity of Concurrent Findings – When both the District Forum and the State Commission agree on a finding of fact (in this case, the validity of the document), the National Commission will not d....
Claims for third-party property damage due to motor vehicle incidents must be adjudicated by Motor Accident Claims Tribunals, not consumer forums.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.