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

R.C.JAIN, S.K.NAIM
Bijoy Kr. Sarangi – Appellant
Versus
Mohimohan Tripathy – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. S.K. Pattnaik, Advocate.
For the Respondents: NEMO.

ORDER

R.C. Jain, Presiding Member —Aggrieved by the order dated 04.12.2007 passed by the Orissa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuttack (for short the ‘State Commission’) in C.D. Appeal No. 406 of 2005, Bijoy Kumar Sarangi (who was arrayed as opposite party No.5 in the complaint filed before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Khurda, Bhubaneswar) has filed the present petition purportedly under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short ‘the Act’). The appeal before the State Commission was also filed by the petitioner- herein against the order dated 23.02.2005 passed by the District Forum Khurda in complaint case No. 382 of 2003. By the said order, the District Forum had partly allowed the complaint filed by the complainant respondent No.1 herein ex-parte against the opposite parties with a direction to the opposite parties to refund the balance deposited amount of Rs. 3,30,000/- (Rupees three lacs thirty thousand only) to the complainant within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the said order with the stipulation that in case of default, the complainant shall be at liberty to recover the said amount along wi
















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