Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005

The case arose from a complaint filed by the wife of the respondent alleging deficiency in service by a nursing home, which was dismissed ex parte by the Maharashtra State Consumer Commission. The Commission later recalled its dismissal order and restored the complaint, prompting the appellants to seek revision before …

The appellant, Texco Marketing Pvt. Ltd., bought a fire insurance policy from Tata AIG that excluded coverage for basement premises, yet the insured shop was located in a basement. After a fire, the insurer denied the claim relying on the exclusion clause. The State Consumer Commission held the insurer liable for defic…

The Supreme Court examined whether a District Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 could extend the time for filing a response to a complaint beyond the 30 days plus a statutorily permitted 15‑day extension under s.13(2)(a), and where the 30‑day period begins. The Court held that s.13(2)(a) uses mandatory lang…