<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (2) TMI 190 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47843</link>
    <description>Consumer fora under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 may direct refund of the price where goods supplied suffer from repeated malfunctioning and the supplier&#039;s conduct shows continuing service or maintenance obligations. Defects arising during the warranty period, together with admitted complaint handling after expiry of warranty, supported a finding of deficiency in service and breach of warranty. The statutory power under Section 14 permitted suitable relief, including refund with interest, and the Sale of Goods Act rule that breach of warranty ordinarily sounds in damages did not exclude that consumer remedy. The limited warranty period therefore did not end liability on these facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2018 16:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=86359" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 190 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47843</link>
      <description>Consumer fora under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 may direct refund of the price where goods supplied suffer from repeated malfunctioning and the supplier&#039;s conduct shows continuing service or maintenance obligations. Defects arising during the warranty period, together with admitted complaint handling after expiry of warranty, supported a finding of deficiency in service and breach of warranty. The statutory power under Section 14 permitted suitable relief, including refund with interest, and the Sale of Goods Act rule that breach of warranty ordinarily sounds in damages did not exclude that consumer remedy. The limited warranty period therefore did not end liability on these facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47843</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>