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

V.B.Gupta, Rekha Gupta
Rukma Devi – Appellant
Versus
Branch Manager, Sahara – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner: Nemo.
For the Respondent: Nemo.

JUDGMENT

V.B. Gupta, Presiding Member—Petitioner/Complainant addressed a letter dated 09.12.2011 to President of this Commission and same has been treated as revision petition. Following averments have been made in it:

“Sir, I had appealed against the case no.183/03 of Cuttack State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Orissa, Cuttack on 24.4.2004. Sir, I had gone to the Consumer Forum 3-4 times at Cuttack but there the officer told that why you come again and again. Whenever there is hearing of your case, we will inform you before. But at the time of hearing, they did not inform us anything; only judgment was sent through post. On going there and asking in the Court, the officer said that they had forgotten to inform about the hearing. Now, nothing can happen here. You appeal in the National Consumer Court.

Therefore, I am sending photo copy of all the records and order of the State Consumer Court so that I get justice.

Now, Manager of Sahara Parivar States that you did not give what we wanted. No, wherever you lodge the case, you cannot win.

So, please arrange to get me proper compensation and give us justifiable help”.

2. Brief facts as emerges from record are that, on


































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