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

SUNITA SHARMA, R.K.VERMA
STATE BANK OF INDIA – Appellant
Versus
HANS RAJ – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. Manoj Chauhan, Mr. Vishal Vasudeva.
For the Respondents: Mr. Praveen Chauhan, Mr. Vikas Rajput.

ORDER :

1. This appeal has been preferred by the against the order dated 06.09.2018 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kangra camp at Chamba, whereby complaint filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called as the Act) was partly allowed against the opposite party No. 1 only which was directed to make payment of Rs.25,000/- as compensation for deficiency of service within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order failing which interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of the order till actual payment was payable. The opposite party No.1 was further directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as litigation charges.

2. It would be apposite to mention here that the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Forum.

3. Brief facts, as averred in the complaint, are that the complainant presented cheque No.478371 dated 14.12.2016 in the sum of Rs.2 lacs drawn on PNB, Sultanpur, District Chamba to the opposite party No.1 on 29.12.2016 to credit the same in his saving account. When the amount of this cheque was not credited in his account, the complainant approached the Opposite Party No.

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