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

R.C.JAIN, ANUPAM DASGUPTA
V. Naryanan – Appellant
Versus
Canara Bank, Nungambakkam Branch – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant :Mr.Vipin Gogia, Advocate.

ORDER

R.C. Jain, Presiding Member— Through this appeal, the original complainant, namely, Mr. V.Narayanan seeks to challenge the order dated 13.04.2010 passed by the Tamil Nadu States Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai ( in short, ‘the State Commission’) in C.C.S.R. No.189 of 2010, whereby complaint of the complainant was dismissed as vexatious and complainant was saddled with the cost of Rs.10,000/- which he has been called upon to deposit in the Legal Aid Account of the State Commission within one month by means of a demand draft with the stipulation that in case the cost is not deposited, the same may be realized by invoking the provisions of section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

2. We have heard Mr. Vipin Gogia, learned counsel representing the appellant at great length and have given our thoughtful consideration to his submissions. Before we dwell on the same, we would like to briefly notice the background preceding the complaint before the State Commission. It would appear that the complainant is a partner of Sealark Fisheries which owned fishing boats for its business. In 1976, Sealark Fisheries had availed of agricultural loan of Rs.1.75 lakh from the opp































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