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

BALVEER PRASAD, VEENA SHARMA
ESHA SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
MUTHOOT FINANCE LIMITED – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Jatin Duggal, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Ms. Puja Khanna, Advocate.

ORDER :

Balveer Prasad, Member—These two appeals, one by the complainant-Ms. Esha Sharma and another by the opposite party- Muthoot Finance Limited, instituted under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, are directed against the order dated 30.3.2013 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun in consumer complaint No. 274 of 2012.

2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeals are that the complainant had taken loan of Rs. 9,300 vide TPL-834 and another loan of Rs. 22,000 vide TPL-843 from the opposite party-Muthoot Finance Limited on 20.11.2009. It is alleged that the complainant had lost her bag, with the result that all the documents relating to the above loan accounts together with some important documents and some jewellery went missing. FIR of the incident was lodged by the complainant with the P.S. Rajpur, Dehradun on 7.8.2010. The complainant approached the financier on 30.8.2011 in relation to the jewellery kept with the financier, with an intent to get the jewellery released, by setting off the dues of the financier. The complainant was shocked to know that her jewellery has been auctioned by the financier without any notice. On 30.8.2011, the complai

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