Deepa Sharma, Presiding Member—Vide this common order, I propose to dispose off the Revision Petition No. 3349 of 2017 and 39 of 2018 filed by the petitioner, who was the opposite party in a complaint filed by the respondent before the District Forum, because similar question of law and facts are involved in both the revision petitions.

2. Revision Petition No. 3349 of 2017 has been filed by the petitioner against the order of the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (in short, the State Commission) dated 14.09.2017 passed in Appeal No.1264/2017 filed by the petitioner against the order of the District Forum in Complaint No.20 of 2017 dated 31.03.2017 filed by the respondent.

3. Revision Petition No.39 of 2018 has been filed by the petitioner against the order of the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (in short, the State Commission) dated 26.10.2017 passed in Appeal No.299/2017 filed by the petitioner against the order of the District Forum in Complaint No.762 of 2016 dated 22.12.2016 filed by the respondent.

4. The admitted facts of this case are that respondent is a senior citizen and invested his retiral benefits amounting to Rs.2,50,