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

R.K.AGRAWAL, S.M.KANTIKAR
Punjab National Bank – Appellant
Versus
Abha Jain – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gautam, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Shiv Prakash Saxena, Advocate

ORDER

1. Delayed condoned.

2. Challenge in this Revision Petition under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (in short “the Act”) by the Petitioners/Opposite Parties in the Complaint, is to the Order dated 14.12.2017 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow (in short “the State Commission”) in First Appeal No. 170 of 2011. By the impugned Order, the State Commission has dismissed the Appeal filed by the Petitioners questioning the legality of the Order dated 01.01.2011 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Meerut (in short, “the District Forum”) in Consumer Complaint No. 55/2008. By the said Order, the District Forum while allowing the Complaint preferred by the Complainant, had directed the Petitioner Bank to refund a sum of Rs.40,000/- to the Complainant towards the value of the Fixed Deposit Receipt along with interest @ 15% p.a from the date of fixed deposit till last payment, pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental and economic damage and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as costs towards litigation.

3. The facts material to the case are that when the Complainant was minor, her grand-mother Late Smt.

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