Back
GUJARAT STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AHMEDABAD
, J
Superintendent of Post v. Jayunbhai K. Ghadiyali
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of complaint against opponents (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments against the district commission's order (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. respondents' defenses and contentions (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. court's findings on evidence and allegations (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. final observations and conclusions reached by the court (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
1. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order rendered by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchmahal on 24.12.2020 in Complaint No. 155 of 2014 the original opponents have filed the present appeal under S.15 of the Consumer Protection Act , 1986 before this Commission. For the sake of the convenience, parties are hereinafter referred to by their original nomenclature.
2. The facts given rise to the present Appeal in a nutshell are as under: It is the case of the complainants that complainants have approached opponent No. 2 and 3 with one Mr. Rajesh Trivedi - an agent of the opponents on 5.6.2005 and shown interest to invest money in a MIS Scheme running as a fixed term deposit for 5 years in postal department. It is further the case of the complainant that as per instruction of the opponent
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
