NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/3652/2009

MD. EHSANNUL HAQUE & ORS. - Complainant(s)

Versus

ARUN KUMAR SINGH & ORS. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. MOHIT KUMAR SHAH

06 Jan 2010

ORDER

Date of Filing: 29 Sep 2009

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. No. RP/3652/2009
(Against the Order dated 29/05/2009 in Appeal No. 71&29/2007 of the State Commission Bihar)
1. MD. EHSANNUL HAQUE & ORS.Borad of Director, Central Bank of Employees, Savings & Credi Self Supported Cooperative Society Ltd.Ganimat Hussain Path, Ward No.8, SupaulBIHAR ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. ARUN KUMAR SINGH & ORS.S/o Late Bedanand Singh, R/o Village & P.O. Bakhri Bazar, P.S. Bakhri, Distt. BegusaraiBIHAR2. PREM KUMAR S/O SIKANDAR SAHR/o Mohalla-Gangjala, Ward no.18, Saharsa, P.S. Distt. SaharsaBIHAR ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN ,PRESIDENTHON'BLE MR. B.K. TAIMNI ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :MR. MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 06 Jan 2010
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

For the Respondent       :          Mr.Akshat Srivastava and Mr.Sarbajit
                                                Dutta, Advocates
 
 

 

          On merits, we agree with the finding recorded by the State Commission. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the consumer fora did not have the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint in view of Section 40 of Bihar Self Supporting Co-operative Societies Act, 1996 which provides settlement of the disputes by the Bihar Co-operative Tribunal. That the Bihar Co-operative Tribunal alone had the jurisdiction to decide the disputes.
          Petitioner had remained ex parte before the District Forum. The point regarding jurisdiction had not been taken up before the District Forum. Petitioner could not be permitted to take this point for the first time either in appeal or in Revision Petition. Dismissed.


......................JASHOK BHANPRESIDENT
......................B.K. TAIMNIMEMBER