NCDRC

NCDRC

FA/322/2007

M/S. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

KRISHAN KUMAR DHANKAR - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. SANJEEV SINGH AND ASSOCIATES

29 Oct 2012

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
APPEAL NO. 322 OF 2007
 
(Against the Order dated 23/03/2007 in Complaint No. 155/2002 of the State Commission Delhi)
1. M/S. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.
UGC 1 11 UPPER GROUND FLOOR AMBA DEEP
14 KASTURBA GANDHI MARG
NEW DELHI 110001
...........Appellant(s)
Versus 
1. KRISHAN KUMAR DHANKAR
R/O RZ-66-A, M-Block, Roshanpura Extn., Najabgarh
New Delhi 110 043
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN, PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. VINEETA RAI, MEMBER

For the Appellant :NEMO
For the Respondent :
Mr.Bhola Singh and Mr.Ishwar Singh,
Advocates

Dated : 29 Oct 2012
ORDER

        Krishan Kumar Dhankar - complainant/respondent, filed the complaint against the appellant which was OP-3 as well as the dealer - M/s Hydro Spares and Services (OP-1) and M/s Larsen & Toubro Ltd.(OP-2).  All these OPs remained ex parte before the State Commission.  State Commission allowed the complaint in following terms :

(i)          OP No.1 shall pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- for having put the complainant to mental agony, harassment for taking the machine time and again for removal of the defects.

(ii)         OP No.2 shall refund the entire cost of the machine to the complainant as he raised a loan from the bank @ 9% interest. Besides OP No.2 shall also pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment.

(iii)        So far as OP No.3 is concerned, it has taken away the machine without resorting to the legal remedy and also raised demand of the balance amount payable by the complainant. OP No.3 shall refund the amount of Rs.4,40,000/- towards the margin money paid by the complainant while raising the loan and shall also pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for wrongful action.

 

        Order against OP-1 attained finality as it did not file any appeal.  OP-2 filed appeal No.305/2007 which was disposed of on 10.12.2008.  The appeal was partly allowed and OP-2 was directed to pay Rs.4 lakh to the complainant.  This appeal was also directed to be listed with F.A. 305/2007.  Since the counsel for the appellant was not present, the same was dismissed for non-prosecution.  Later on, on an application filed by the appellant, the appeal was restored and has been listed for hearing today.

        Even on the second call, counsel for the appellant is not present.  This is the last case on board today.  Dismissed for non-prosecution.

 

 
......................J
ASHOK BHAN
PRESIDENT
......................
VINEETA RAI
MEMBER

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.