SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

P.N.KASHALKAR, S.P.LALE
Branch Manager – Appellant
Versus
Ramakant T. Khandke – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant: None
For the Respondent:Mr. J.M. Puranik, Advocate

ORDER(ORAL)

P.N. Kashalkar, Presiding Judicial Member—None for the appellant. Heard Mr. J.M. Puranik-Advocate for the respondent extensively.

2. We also perused the appeal memo and the impugned order passed by the District Consumer Forum. Certain deposits were kept by the complainant with Syndicate Bank. There were 10 deposits and after maturity, deposits were not returned with accrued interest thereon. When approached, bank told that it was in the joint account of Ramakant Tukaram Khandke and his father Tukaram Shripad Khandke. After the death of said Tukaram Shripad Khandke, bank did not allow the complainant to operate the account and no interest was deposited in the account of Tukaram Khandke, since brothers of complainant objected for return of deposits to the complainant and he had to file civil suit No. 174/96 in Kalyan court. It was decreed and counter-claim of the defendant(complainant Respondent herein) for the amount of Rs. 1,35,000/- pertaining to F.Ds was directed to be paid by the Civil Court by the said decree. Even thereafter the O.P. had not paid amount to the complainant and therefore he suffered financial loss and mental agony. He therefore filed consumer complaint


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top