law cases

1. 1) WASHING MACHINE
No B doese not have remedy against comp,b remedy has against manufacturer.
2)laptop
B cannot claim refund against shopkeeper, it can claim against manufacturer
It is matter of UTP. Bcz brocher mian kuch aur likha hai ,reality main kuch aur hai..
2) FRUIT JUICE
Good sold must correspond to the description. But this is not with this case.
Good sold does not correspond to the description. So Y has remedy
3) LAMP
4) Yes he can have remedy.a product sold by tis general name should be fit for basic purposefor which
it is used product being of merchantable quality.
5) IRON LAMP
ACC TO SEC 14 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACTCompensation & damages for injury & loss to the
Consumers due to negligence of goods/service providers.
YES , YES, YES
6 fluorescent electric lamp
bulb WAS NOT of merchantable quality.
Buyer can claim Bureau of Indian Standards.
Partenship
1 No
2 2 partnersip firm are separated, both firm are different.
So loss of one partnersip firm cannot be covered from other firm prft…
3)
Building is in d name of firm,a cannot claim d building
As soon as A entered in to the partenship firm and contributed his building as his capital
Building become properity of partnership firm.at tym pf dissolution of firm the property wiil be
divided acc to partenship deed…
5)
Acc to partnership deed, x is working as an agent,so dispute is wrong.
6
claimed was right.death of any partner dissolve d firm…

2. 7
tax authorities claim is wrong.as per d law fresh contract has to be made in legal hiering after
death of existing partner.
CASE 2
person cannot get remedy from a consumer court against the sellers and manufacturers of the
watch bcz he is not consumer.
CASE 3
he CANNOT move a consumer forum as a consumer underthe Consumer Protection Act, BCZ HE
IS NOT A CONSUMER.
CASE 4
NO legal remedies available to Y underthe Consumer Protection Act BUT AVAILABLE TO
COMPETITION ACT.
CASE 6
Initial case of reno is wrong.
2nd case
the answer be different if actually 15-20 drops of Reno were needed to produce the same
whitening effect. sano correspond to reno….
CASE 7
NOT CASE OF UTP.
CASE 9
IT IS
Possiblefor the State Government to use the Consumer Protection Act BCZ state govt is
complainant so he can complain under CPA.
CASE 10
REMEDY AVAILABLE UNDER CPA AND COMPETION ACT.