View 1299 Cases Against Kotak Mahindra Bank
View 1299 Cases Against Kotak Mahindra Bank
View 2748 Cases Against Kotak Mahindra
View 177 Cases Against Narender Singh
Narender Singh & Anr filed a consumer case on 06 Feb 2018 against kotak Mahindra Bank & Anr in the New Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/402/2017 and the judgment uploaded on 13 Mar 2018.
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI
(DISTT. NEW DELHI),
‘M’ BLOCK, 1STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,
I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.
Case No.CC/402/2017 Dated:
In the matter of:
Son of Mr. Mohan Singh Kiroula
Wife of Narender Singh
Both resident of
B- 1429, GF, Green fields ,
Faridabad, Haryana. ……..COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
14, Ambadeep , Kasturba Gandhi Marg,
Cannaught Place, New Delhi 110001
14, Ambadeep , 7th Floor, Kasturba Gandhi Marg,
Cannaught Place, New Delhi 110001
14, Ambadeep , 7th Floor, Kasturba Gandhi Marg,
Cannaught Place, New Delhi 110001 ……..Opposite Party
MEMBER : NIPUR CHANDNA
ORDER
Complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging the deficiency in services against OP. Arguments on admission of complaint heard on behalf of the complainant. We have gone through the complaint as well as Annexure filed with it.
In Ambrish Kumar Shukla and Ors. Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Case no. 97 of 2016, decided by Hon’ble NCDRC on 07/10/2016, Hon’ble NCDRC has held that in case where even part of deficiency is to be removed, the full value of the subject matter whether goods or services will be taken as the value of goods and services for deciding the pecuniary Jurisdiction. In the present complaint, the complainant has mentioned in Para 4 of his complaint that the cost of the subject matter of the complaint i.e. Home loan is Rs. 61,79,000 /-, as the aggregate value of the alleged Home loan against which reliefs claimed exceeds more than Rs. 20 Lakhs, this District Forum has no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.
In the light of Ambrish Kumar Shukla and Ors. Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Case no. 97 of 2016, decided by Hon’ble NCDRC on 07/10/2016, the complaint be returned to the complainant along with it Annexures. The complaint be returned to complainant with following particulars in the light of the discussion of Hon’ble NCDRC in the matter of Tushar Batra & Anr. Vs. M/S Unitech Limited decided on 26/04/2017, Case no.-299 of 2014 .
Before this District Forum on 08.09.2017.
Son of Mr. Mohan Singh Kiroula
Wife of Narender Singh
Both resident of
B- 1429, GF, Green fields ,
Faridabad, Haryana.
. Brief statement of reasons for returning the complaint.
In Ambrish Kumar Shukla and Ors. Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Case no. 97 of 2016, decided by Hon’ble NCDRC on 07/10/2016, Hon’ble NCDRC has held that in case where even part of deficiency is to be removed, the full value of the subject matter whether goods or services will be taken as the value of goods and services for deciding the pecuniary Jurisdiction. In the present complaint, the complainant has mentioned in Para 4 of his complaint that the cost of the subject matter of the complaint i.e. Home loan is Rs. 61,79,000 /-, as the aggregate value of the alleged Home loan against which reliefs claimed exceeds more than Rs. 20 Lakhs , this District Forum has no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.
In the light ofAmbrish Kumar Shukla and Ors. Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Case no. 97 of 2016, decided by Hon’ble NCDRC on 07/10/2016,the complaint be returned to the complainant along with it Annexures by retaining a copy of the same for records and with liberty to the complainant to file Complaint before competent Forum as per the Law.
Announced on open Forum on06.02.2018
(ARUN KUMAR ARYA)
PRESIDENT
(NIPUR CHANDNA) (H M VYAS)
MEMBER MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.