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

IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH OF THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MADURAI.

Present: THIRU.N. RAJASEKAR, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER

F.A.No.15/2015

(Against the order made in C.C.No.100/2012 dated 12.03.2014 on the file of the

District Forum, Tiruchirappalli.)

MONDAY, THE 28th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

The Branch Manager,

Indian Bank,

Ordinance Factory Branch,

Tiruchirappalli – 620 025. Appellant/Opposite Party

-Vs-

1. Tmt.Selvi,

W/o Late.Balakrishnan. 1st Respondent/1st Complainant

2. Arun,

S/o Late.Balakrishnan. 2nd Respondent/2nd Complainant

3. Anand,

S/o Late.Balakrishnan. 3rd Respondent/3rd Complainant

4. Minor.Aravind,

S/o Late.Balakrishnan. 4th Respondent/4th Complainant

5. Minor.Sakthibala,

S/o Late.Balakrishnan. 5th Respondent/5th Complainant

6. Minor.Soundharya,

D/o Late.Balakrishnan. 6th Respondent/6th Complainant

(Minor respondents 4, 5 & 6 are rep.by their

mother and natural guardian the 1st respondent

herein all are residing at

Door No.1/10, Gudi Street,

Kumbakkudi,

Tiruchirappalli – 25.

Counsel for Appellant/Opposite Party : M/s.T.Govindasamy, Advocate.

Counsel for Respondents-1 to 6/Complainants-1 to 6 : Mr.Saravanan, Advocate.

This appeal coming before me for final hearing on 21.10.2021 and on perusing

the material records, this Commission made the following:-

ORDER

THIRU.N. RAJASEKAR, PRESIDINGJUDICIAL MEMBER.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/opposite party under section 15 read

with section 17(1) (a) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order of the

learned District Forum, Tiruchirappalli made in C.C.No.100/2012, dated 12.03.2014,

allowing the complaint.

2. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties are referred to here as

they stood arrayed in the learned District Consumer Disputes Redresssal Forum,

Tiruchirappalli

3. The opposite party suffering by an order, directing the opposite party to hand over

the Tractor having Engine No.3100F 72-G 122281 and Chassis No.FZE.S.7.12151913 to

the complainants within a month from the date of receipt of this order and directing the

opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- to the complainants towards compensation

for mental agony and sufferings underwent by the complainants due to deficiency in

service committed by the opposite party and directing the opposite party to hand over

the registration certificate and insurance policy of the tractor to the complainants and to

pay a sum of Rs.2000/- cost to the complainants in the hands of the learned District

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Tiruchirappali (hereinafter in short “District

Forum”) have preferred this appeal before this Commission.

4. The case of the complaint is as follows:- Thecomplainants are the legal heirs

of the deceased borrower by name Balakrishnan. The 1st complainant submits that her

husband was died on 08.06.2010. After the death of the said Balakrishnan, themselves

and the other complainants referred to above alone had succeeded to his Estate. The

1st complainant’s husband late Balakrishnan had availed of a loan from the opposite

party Branch in the year 2009 and with the same had bought a 'Sonalika Tractor DL.

74011 TN 45 AY-2211 Tractor for his agricultural operations. After purchase by the

Tractor by the said late Balakrishnan that opposite Party retained custody of the original

documents pertaining to the Tractor namely Registration Certificate, Insurance Policy

etc., The usual practice

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top