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

BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

cOMMISsION : HYDERABAD.

CC.NO.12 OF 2020

Between:

Mr.Vishweshwar Rao Japala,

Aged: 47 years, Occ: Business,

Smt.Srujana Japala,

Aged: 45 yrs, Oc: Housewife,

Both are residing at:

R/o.4B Pemmasani Residency,

Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 500 082.

.Complainant

.

And

Bank of Baroda

Rep. by its Senior Manager,

ROSAR Branch, 6-1-84/13, 1st Floor,

Khusru Jung House,

Secretariat Road, Saifabad,

Khairatabad, Hyderabad - 500 004.

....Opposite Party

Counsel for the Complainant

M/s.Y.Krishna Mohan Rao

Counsel for the Opposite Party

Admission stage

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL..

PRESIDENT

HON'BLE SMT.MEENA RAMANATHAN.

LADY MEMBER

MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY

TWO THOUSAND TWENTY ONE

****

1. This is a complaint filed under section 17(1)/a)}{i) of the Consumer Protection

Act, 1986 praying this Commission to pay Rs. 58,59,000/- towards interest

accrued from 29.05.2017 till 07.09.2019, Rs.25,00,000/- towards compensation

and Rs.50,000/- towards legal expenses in total Rs.84,09,000/- with interest@

18% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint till the date of realization

in the interest of justice.

Order

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Complainant. Manifestly,

the consideration that has been paid by the Complainant towards valuc of the

goods that have been acquired is about Rs.2.17 Crores. The authoritative

1S judgment

which

holds

the ground insofar as the present complaint is

concerned, is the one rendered in "Ambrish Kumar Shukla & 21 others Vs.

Ferrous Infrastructure Put.Ltd.," I (2017) CPJ 1 (NC) which categorically

laid down that the value of the goods that is to be taken into consideration for

determining the pecuniary jurisdiction of the different hierarchies under the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Therefore, the complaint in the present Forum

is not maintainable and hence the same is returned for want of pecuniary

jurisdiction. Registry shall return the original papers of the complaint along

with the court fees paid, for being presenting in the appropriate Forum, if he is

so advised.

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 Back to top