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

SUBHASH CHANDRA
Sunita Bali – Appellant
Versus
Branch Manager, HDFC Bank – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Parbodh Chander Bali – In Person
For the Respondent:Mr. Sharique Hussain, Advocate

ORDER

This revision petition under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the ‘Act’) assails the order dated 20.08.2018 in First Appeal No. 388 of 2018 dated 20.08.2018 disposed vide common order in First Appeal No. 401 of 2018 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (in short, the ‘State Commission’) dated 20.08.2018 allowing the appeal and dismissing order dated 18.05.2018 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Amritsar (in short, the ‘District Forum’) in Consumer Complaint no. 17/186 of 2012.

2. The facts, in brief, according to the revision petitioners, are that they had obtained a loan of Rs 11 lakhs for the marriage of their son from the respondent on 23.05.2015 on floating rate of interest. On 10.07.2015 they approached the respondent bank to foreclose the loan in one instalment. However, the respondent refused to do so stating that foreclosure charges and penal interest would apply, and the loan could be closed only in monthly instalments over 7 years. It is stated that the amount was not accepted in the loan account and instead two fixed deposits of Rs 8 lakhs and Rs 2 lakhs respectively were opened on 10.0

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