WakeelSaab.in

 Facts  Consumer purchased a laptop with an extended warranty. The said warranty covers the repair of the said laptop within the period of warranty. After using the said laptop, consumer found that there were some issues with the same including the display problems. The same was intimated to the Company, who sent their officials for the repair of the same. However, each time one defect is cured, some other issue comes up with the working of the laptop. It all happened during the period of extended warranty. Finally, the consumer approached the Delhi Consumer Forum, for deficiency of service. After service of the summons/notice, the Opposite Party, that is, the Company who manufactured the said laptop approached before the Consumer Forum and stated that since they have provided complete assistance during the period of warranty, that too, free of cost, hence, they have not committed any error and hence the Complaint filed by the Consumer be dismissed.   OBSERVATIONS OF...

RECENTLY CHANDIGARH DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM ORDERED A REFUND OF RS. 80,000/- PAID AS FEE ALONGWITH INTEREST AND A COMPENSATION FOR DEFICIENCY OF SERVICE ON PART OF AN EDTECH FIRM.  FACTS  A PARENT IN CHANDIGARH ENROLLED HER DAUGHTER TO THE EDTECH FIRM. THEY PROMISED THAT THEY WILL PROVIDE THE STUDY MATERIAL ALONG WITH LIVE CLASSES AND TABLET FOR THE SAME. HOWEVER, AFTER THE RECIEPT OF FEE OF RS. 80,000/-, THEY FAILED TO DELIVER THE SAID SERVICES. IN OTHER WORDS, THEY NEITHER PROVIDED THE COMPLETE STUDY MATERIAL NOR HANDED OVER THE TABLET AS PROMISED. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAME, THE SAID PARENT FILED A COMPLAINT. TO THE CONTRARY, THE DEFENCE TAKEN BY THE SAID FIRM WAS THAT THEY HAD PROVIDED THE SERVICES AS AGREED. EVEN THEY STATED THAT THEY WERE ALSO WILLING TO REFUND THE FEE BUT THE COMPLAINANT FAILED TO ACCEPT THE SAME. DECISION AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, THE CONSUMER COURT GAVE THE ORDER IN FAVOR OF THE COMPLAINANT DIRECTING THE COACHING INSTITUTE TO REFUND THE FEE ALONG WIT...

Hello friends, today we shall talk about the provisions of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 which facilitates the process of substituting the legal heirs of the deceased plaintiff or defendant. Suppose a person instituted a civil case, and during the pendency of the said case, he/she died. In such a scenario, the case shall continue, and the legal heir of the person can be substituted. However, this can be done by filing an application under the provisions of Order 22 Rule 3 CPC, and praying before the Court that the mentioned legal heirs be substituted in place of original plaintiff.  Similarly, when a person against whom a case is filed, dies during the pendency, in such an event, he can be also substituted and the same can be done by filing an appropriate application under the provisions of Order 22 Rule 4 CPC.  The point to remember here is that the aforesaid application is to be filed within a maximum period of 3 months from the date of death or from the date of knowledge of de...