Back
GAUTAM CHOURDIYA, PRAMOD KUMAR VARMA
Indusind Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
Firoz Kumar Beck – Respondent
ORDER
Gautam Chourdiya, President—This appeal, filed under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (hereinafter called “the Act” for short) is directed against order dated 28.07.2023 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ambikapur (hereinafter called “District Commission” for short) in complaint case No.CC/2019/144 whereby the complaint filed by the respondent No.1 herein was partly allowed and the opposite party No.2 / appellant herein was directed to pay to the complainant / respondent No.1 the amount of wrongful loss suffered by him of Rs.6,40,850/- (Six Lacs Forty Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty) with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of complaint 24.12.2019 till the actual date of payment. The opposite party No.2/ appellant was also directed to issue NoC pertaining to the loan contract of vehicle of the complainant/ respondent No.1 and to reflect his CIBIL as debt free. Compensation for mental agony Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) and cost of litigation Rs.5,000/- (Five Thousand) were also directed to be paid. It was further directed that entire amount of award be deposited by the opposite party No.2/ appellant in the District Commission within 6
“Once the matter had been decided in an arbitration, the complaint in the Consumer Forum held not maintainable.”
Deficiency in service occurs when repossession is conducted unlawfully without proper notice, violating consumer protection laws.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
