NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/699/2010

PAVAS PREET SINGH (MINOR) - Complainant(s)

Versus

LIC OF INDIA & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. KAMLESH SHAMBHARWAL

22 Mar 2010

ORDER


NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. 699 OF 2010
(Against the Order dated 23/11/2009 in Appeal No. 149/2009 of the State Commission Punjab)
1. PAVAS PREET SINGH (MINOR)R/o. Gobind Nagar, Kahnuwan Road, Batala, Tehsil BatalaGurdarspurPunjab ...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. LIC OF INDIA & ANR.Batala BranchGurdaspurPunjab2. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIAAmritsar Division, Jeewan Prakash 4-5, District Shopping Complex,Ranjeet AvenueAmritsar ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.C. JAIN ,PRESIDING MEMBERHON'BLE MR. ANUPAM DASGUPTA ,MEMBER
For the Petitioner :NEMO
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 22 Mar 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.

This is the third occasion that a request for adjournment has been received by post from the Petitioner. We do not approve rather deprecate such a practice of the petitioner seeking repeated adjournments by writing letters to this Commission. We are unable to show any further indulgence in the matter and the prayer is declined. The revision petition has been considered. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances and that the complainant admitted before the State Commission that the builder has already provided separate electricity connections/meters in the name of the ..2.. respective complainants, we are of the opinion that the impugned order passed by the State Commission is just and does not suffer from any material irregularity, illegality or jurisdictional error which calls for interference by this Commission in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction u/s 21(b) the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The revision petition is dismissed accordingly.



......................JR.C. JAINPRESIDING MEMBER
......................ANUPAM DASGUPTAMEMBER