Bombay HC: Insolvency Cannot be Used to Evade a Family Court’s Maintenance Order  ||  Kerala HC: Forklifts and Factory Cranes Are Motor Vehicles and Must be Registered under MV Act  ||  Guj HC: Edible Crude Palm Kernel Oil Qualifies for Duty Exemption; End-Use Condition not Applicable  ||  NCLAT Delhi: Advance under Land-Development MoU is not Financial Debt and Cannot Trigger CIRP  ||  NCLAT: NCLT Cannot Change Capital Structure of a Legally Compliant Successful Auction Purchaser  ||  Supreme Court: Endless Investigation and Long Delay in Filing Chargesheet Can Justify Quashing Case  ||  SC: Landowners Accepting Compensation Settlements Cannot Later Claim Statutory Benefits  ||  Supreme Court: Provident Fund Dues Have Priority over a Bank’s Claim under the SARFAESI Act  ||  Supreme Court: Indian Courts Cannot Appoint Arbitrators for Arbitrations Seated Outside India  ||  Madras HC: Police Superintendent not Liable For IO’s Delay In Filing Chargesheet or Closure Report    

SC: Reconsideration Required of the Judgement That Brought Doctors Under Consumer Protection Act - (15 May 2024)

CONSUMER

Supreme Court while deciding whether advocates can be held liable under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, has observed that the judgement that brought doctors under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 also requires reconsideration.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT   RECONSIDERATION   DOCTORS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved