Skip to content

Judgments

86 judgments match your search. Search by party name, citation (e.g. LOK 2026 (10) Ker. 5), case number, judge or words in the judgment, or pick a date of decision.

Clear

LOK 2026 (10) SC 154 · Supreme Court of India

Madhu Kudapa (Formerly Known As K. Madhusudhan Rao) v. M/S Lodha Healthy Constructions and Developer Private Limited (LHCPL) & Anr.

Equivalent citations: 2026 INSC 1131

SubjectConsumer Law
JudgesJustice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Justice Alok Aradhe
ActsConsumer Protection Act, 1986

Restitution restores and returns value to the person at whose expense a benefit was received; it does not redistribute or confer a windfall gain. Where a builder defaults on delivering an apartment financed partly by the homebuyer's personal funds and partly by a bank loan…

LOK 2023 (10) SC 196 · Supreme Court of India

M. A Biviji v. Sunita

Equivalent citations: 2023 INSC 938 : 2023 (15) SCR 113 : AIR 2023 SC 5527 : (2024) 2 SCC 242 : 2024 (1) KLT SN 5 : 2023 KHC (Online) 6945

SubjectConsumer Protection, Medical Negligence
JudgesJustice Hrishikesh Roy, Justice Manoj Misra
ActsConsumer Protection Act, 1986 (Section 23; Section 21; Section 12)

Choosing nasotracheal intubation after failed tracheostomy decannulation was an accepted course of treatment; no breach of duty or causal link proved; NCDRC's finding of medical negligence and award set aside.

LOK 2019 (4) SC 25 · Supreme Court of India

Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure LTD. v. Govindan Raghavan

Equivalent citations: 2019 INSC 458 : AIR 2019 SC 1779 : 2019 (2) KHC (SN) 31 : 2019 (2) KLJ 572 : 2019 KLT (Online) 3004 : 2019 (5) Scale 680 : (2019) 5 SCC 725

SubjectConsumer Protection, Contract, Real Estate
JudgesJustice Uday Umesh Lalit, Justice Indu Malhotra
ActsConsumer Protection Act, 1986 (Section 2(1)(o); Section 2(1)(r); Section 23); Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 (Rule 15)

The builder was to apply for the occupancy certificate within 39 months of excavation, plus a 6-month grace period, but obtained it only on 23.07.2018, almost three years late. The flat purchaser, who had paid about Rs. 4.48 crore and serviced a bank loan in the meantime, filed a consumer complaint in January 2017 seeking a refund. The National Commission ordered a refund with interest at 10.7% simple per annum under Rule 15 of the Haryana RERA Rules, 2017, excluding the period of an interim stay obtained by the purchaser. The builder relied on Clauses 11.5 and 20 of the Agreement, which required a 90-day termination notice after a further 12-month wait and capped interest at 9% or 6%.

LOK 2018 (3) SC 127 · Supreme Court of India

M/s. Fortune Infrastructure (Now Known As M/S. Hicon Infrastructure) v. Trevor Dlima & Ors.

Equivalent citations: AIR 2018 SC 2975 : 2018 (4) Scale 444 : (2018) 5 SCC 442

SubjectConsumer Protection, Contract, Real Estate
JudgesJustice N.V. Ramana, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer
ActsConsumer Protection Act, 1986 (Section 2(1)(g)); Indian Contract Act, 1872

A builder who transfers a project and fails to deliver a booked flat is deficient in service; compensation is compensatory under contract principles, and the Supreme Court reduced the NCDRC award by fixing the market rate at Rs.50,000 per sq. ft.

LOK 2015 (10) SC 1522 · Supreme Court of India

B.S. Sheshagiri Setty & Ors. v. State of Karnataka & Ors.

Subject–
JudgesJustice T.S. Thakur, Justice V. Gopala Gowda, Justice Vinod Kr.Jha, Justice Mala Kumari Sharma
ActsKarnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 (Section 108); Karnataka Cooperative Societies Rules, 1960 (Rule 38(7)); Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 (Section 108); Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Section 24A); Limitation Act, 1963 (Section 29(2)); KCS Rules, 1960 (Rule 38)