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

SURJIT SINGH, CHANDER SHEKHAR SHARMA, PREM CHAUHAN
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA – Appellant
Versus
NEETU NAMDHARI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ms. Shilpa Sood, Advocate,Mr. Navlesh Verma, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Amit K. Vaid, Advocate, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Vijay Arora, Advocate, for the Respondent

ORDER

Surjit Singh, President (Oral)- This appeal under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, has been filed by Punjab National Bank (Mauhari Branch), challenging the order dated 19th December, 2008, of learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Shimla, whereby a complaint, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, filed by respondent, Ajay Kumar Sharma, has been allowed and appellant ordered to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000 as damages for deficiency in banking service and also to pay Rs. 1,000, on account of litigation expenses.

2. Respondent No. l, Ajay Kumar Sharma, hereinafter referred to as complainant , filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the present appellant, Director General, Indian Postal Telegraph, Union of India through Secretary (Post and Telegraph), Deputy Manager, Maruti Udyog Limited and Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise Division No. 1, Gurgaon, making the following allegations. Complainant being an unemployed youth purchased a Maruti Car for self employment, for earning his livelihood under a scheme o

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