K. S. Chandra Sekhara VS Authorised Officer, PGF Ltd. , Head Office

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

C.VISWANATH, RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA
K. S. Chandra Sekhara – Appellant
Versus
Authorised Officer, PGF Ltd. , Head Office – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. B.C. Santosh Kumar, Advocate

ORDER

The present Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/Complainant against order dated 04.01.2021 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karnataka (for short “the State Commission”) in Appeal No. 1444 of 2018, whereby the Appeal filed by the Petitioner was dismissed.

2. The case of the Complainant/Petitioner is that the he had deposited a sum of Rs.25,000/- with Opposite Party No. 3 on the assurance of refund of Rs.40,375/- on maturity. On 25.11.2015, Original Documents related to the deposit were submitted with Opposite Party No.3. However, Opposite Party No. 3 failed to refund the assured amount even after repeated requests by the Complainant. On 10.04.2017, the Complainant sent a legal notice, but it was not replied by either of the Parties. Aggrieved by non-payment of the maturity amount alongwith interest, the Complainant preferred Consumer Complaint No.331/2017 before the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Mysore with following prayer:-

a)	interest at 18% rate from 25/05/2015 till the date of settlement, on the amount of	R

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

C.VISWANATH, RAM SURAT RAM MAURYAK. S. Chandra Sekhara – AppellantVersusAuthorised Officer, PGF Ltd. , Head Office – Respondent

Cases Referred (2)

C.VISWANATH, RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA
K. S. Chandra Sekhara – Appellant
Versus
Authorised Officer, PGF Ltd. , Head Office – Respondent