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

RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA
Hakim Singh – Appellant
Versus
Raghuveer Singh – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Praveen Mahajan, Advocate

ORDER

Ram Surat Ram Maurya, Presiding Member.—Heard Mr. Praveen Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner.

2. Aforementioned revision has been filed from the order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh dated 02.08.2018, passed in First Appeal No.794 of 2017 (arising out of order of District Consumer Forum, Agra, dated 06.04.2017, passed in CC/243/2007) whereby the complaint was allowed with cost of Rs.5000/- and the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.219900/- with interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint till the date of payment and the appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed.

3. Raghuveer Singh (the respondent) filed CC/243/2017, for directing Maa Sidhidatri Sheet Grih (the petitioner) (i) to pay Rs.508600/-, for misappropriation of his potatoes stored in cold storage of the petitioner.

4. The complainant stated that he had stored 733 sacks potatoes (each sack contained 50 kg. potatoes), in the cold storage of the petitioner on 30.03.2007, 02.04.2007, 04.04.2007, 05.04.2007, for which, the petitioner had issued receipts Nos.1312, 1330, 1333, 1380, 1455 and 11384. When the complainant went to take back his potatoes on 18.10.2007, then

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