NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/2883/2005

SHRI RAM SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

INDERJEET AHUJA - Opp.Party(s)

S.B.SINGH, ADV.

22 Jul 2009

ORDER

Date of Filing: 11 Nov 2005

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. No. RP/2883/2005
(Against the Order dated 10/07/2005 in Appeal No. 1557/1999 of the State Commission Delhi)
1. SHRI RAM SINGHR/O D-36, GALI NO.2 BIRJ PURI DELHI ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. INDERJEET AHUJAJ-85, BERIWALA BAGH HARI NAGAR NEW DELHI 2. INDERJEET AHUJA--- ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN ,PRESIDENTHON'BLE MR. B.K. TAIMNI ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :Ms. Nisha, adv. for S.B.SINGH, ADV., Advocate
For the Respondent :RAJAN SAUJA

Dated : 22 Jul 2009
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.

Petitioner was the opposite party before the District Forum.

          Respondent/complainant parked his Maruti Van in MCD Parking at Mori Gate, which was being run by the petitioner on contract and the keys of the car were handed over to the attendants at the parking.  When the complainant came back in the evening to collect the car, he found the car missing.  Immediately, thereafter he lodged an FIR.  As the petitioner failed to compensate the respondent, he filed a complaint before the District Forum.

 

-2-

          The District Forum vide its order dated 12.10.1999 allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to pay a compensation of              Rs.1 Lac to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum w.e.f. 28.7.1997 till its realization.  Costs of Rs.1000/- were also awarded.

          Aggrieved against the order passed by the District Forum, the petitioner filed an appeal before the State Commission.  Award of    Rs. 1 Lac was maintained.  However, in lieu of the interest, Rs.10,000/- were awarded by way of compensation.  Present revision petition has been          filed challenging the order of the State Commission as well as the District Forum.

          The finding recorded by the District Forum, which has been affirmed by the State Commission is a finding of fact.  The car parked by the respondent, the keys of which had been handed over to the attendants, was found MISSING in the evening.  Both the foras below have found that the respondent had parked the car in the parking plot of the petitioner from where the same was stolen/taken away. 

 


-3-

          Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out anything on the record to persuade us to take a different view.  There is no merit in the revision petition.  Dismissed.  No costs.

          At the time of issuing notice, petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 1 Lac with liberty to the respondent to withdraw the same.

            Counsel for the respondent states that he has already withdrawn the sum of Rs.1 Lac along with accrued interest of Rs.9000/-.  After taking instructions from the respondent who is present in the court, he states that the Decree stands satisfied as he does not insist on the payment of balance amount of Rs.1000/-.



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