NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/2713/2010

TATA SKY LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

MAHABIR PARSAD & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. KNM & PARTNERS

06 Aug 2010

ORDER


NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. 2713 OF 2010
(Against the Order dated 19/03/2010 in Appeal No. 257/2009 of the State Commission Rajasthan)
1. TATA SKY LTD.Having its Registered Office at 3rd Floor, Bombay Dyeing, A.O. Building, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, WorliMumbai - 400025Maharashtra ...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. MAHABIR PARSAD & ANR.T-1/B/115, Saheyugh Appartments, Sector-6, Vidhayadhar NagarJaipurRajasthan2. MAHALAXMI COMMUNICATIONS20/A, Madhu Nagar, Sikar Road, HarmandhaJaipurRajasthan ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. BATTA ,PRESIDING MEMBERHON'BLE MR. VINAY KUMAR ,MEMBER
For the Petitioner :NEMO
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 06 Aug 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.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The District Forum awarded total compensation of Rs.22,000/- which was reduced by the State Commission to Rs.11,000/-. The State Commission found that the Tata Sky in their reply to the plaint on 7.8.2007 had admitted that there was technical flaw on account of which, the amount of the Respondent No.1/Complaint had gone to the others account and thereafter in lieu of the coupon, the adjustment of the amount was made in the accounts of Respondent No.1. Thus, the deficiency is writ large on the part of the petitioner company. We do not find any reason whatsoever to interfere in the concurrent findings of two fora below as we do not find any illegality, material irregularity or jurisdictional error in the order of the State Commission. The revision is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.


......................JR.K. BATTAPRESIDING MEMBER
......................VINAY KUMARMEMBER