Haryana

Ambala

CC/311/2019

Vishal Kohli - Complainant(s)

Versus

PNB - Opp.Party(s)

Raghav Talwar

19 Oct 2022

ORDER

 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

 

                                                          Complaint case no.         :     311 of 2019

                                                          Date of Institution           :     01.10.2019

                                                          Date of decision    :     19.10.2022.

 

Vishal Kohli, S/o Sh. V.L. Kohli, R/o Chanderpuri, P.O. Kuldeepnagar, Ambala, Haryana 133004.

                                                                                       ……. Complainant.

                                                Versus

1. Punjab National Bank, through the Manager, Credit Card Division, Atma Ram House, 12th Floor, 1, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi - 110 001
2. Punjab National Bank, through its Manager, Card Processing Centre, A-37, Sector - 60, Noida, Uttar Pradesh - 201 301.

 

….…. Opposite Parties

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.

 

Present:       Shri Aditya Verma, Advocate, counsel for the complainant.

                     Shri Ashwani Nandra, Advocate, counsel for the OPs.

                  

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

1.                Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

(i) To  regularize the credit account of the complainant and to reimburse the amount of Rs.18,490/-, alongwith Rs.735.08/- (total amounting to Rs. 19,225.08/-), which was wrongfully withdrawn from the account of the complainant by the OPs, along with interest @ of 12% per annum from the date of the deduction of the said amount till its realization;

(ii)  To pay Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant. 

(iii) To immediately report correct data, in terms of the order of this Hon'ble Commission, pertaining to the credit card account of the complainant to the Credit Information Bureau;

(iv) To pay Rs.35,200/-, towards legal expenses including any other expense incurred during the course of the proceedings

                                      OR.

Grant any other relief to which the complainant is found entitled to. 

2.             Brief facts of the case are that the complainant has a savings bank account no. 1952000403110271 maintained with the OP Bank at its Branch in Sonepat. The complainant also had a credit card bearing No.4197890000654292 issued by the OP Bank. The complainant made all payments with respect to the credit card services in a timely manner and is not in default. In the late evening of 02.01.2015, the complainant received three messages on his mobile phone (no. 94160-26149) regarding three transactions amounting to a total of Rs.48,188.88 from his Credit Card, which were fraudulent and were not authorized by him. The complainant immediately contacted the Customer Care Centre of the OP Bank at (Phone No. 1800 180-2345) and informed the OP Bank about the same and also requested that his Card No.4197890000654292 be blocked. However, the complainant had to make several calls before the said card was finally blocked by the OP Bank. On 03.01.2015, the complainant made a complaint regarding the above-mentioned fraudulent transactions at Police Station Parao, which was recorded vide Complaint No.3-Dasti, and also sent the details of the fraudulent transaction to the OP Bank vide email on the same day. On the same day, the complainant sent the Transaction Dispute Form as requested by the employee of the OP Bank. Despite receiving the said Form, the OP Bank again sent an email dated 05.01.2015 for the Transaction Dispute Form, which the complainant again sent vide email dated 06.01.2015. On 26.02.2015, the OP Bank sent a letter dated 10.02.2015 to the complainant from the Manager, Card Processing Centre of the OP Bank bearing date-10.02.2015, along with the merchant slips dated 02.01.2015 pertaining to the fraudulent transactions. The physical copy of the said letter was received by the complainant on 27.02.2015. Vide the said letter, the complainant was asked to send a written intimation to the OP Bank, alongwith written response from the merchants involved, in case he wished to dispute the transactions by 02.03.2015, i.e. within 3 days of receipt of the letter dated 10.02.2015. One of the merchant order slips provided by the OP Bank was hardly legible, but the fact that the signatures on the same did not match is quite evident from a bare perusal of the same. The OP Bank was well aware that the transactions were fraudulent, because firstly, the signatures on the merchant order slips provided by the OP Bank vide the above-mentioned letter dated 10.02.2015 (Annexure C-4) did not match the signatures of the complainant; secondly, the signatures on the two slips did not even match with each other; and thirdly, the fraudulent transactions were made at Moradabad, while the complainant was in Ambala, which was also in the knowledge of the OP Bank. As far as the fraudulent transaction of Rs.100/- the same was not reflected in the Credit Card statement of the complainant prepared by the OP Bank, and the total amount under dispute became Rs.48,088.88/-. The complainant sent a response dated 28.02.2015 (Annexure C-5 Colly.) by post as well as by email to the OP Bank in response to the letter dated 10.02.2015, disputing the fraudulent transactions. Despite the complainant having raised dispute regarding the above-mentioned fraudulent transactions with the OP Bank vide his letter dated 28.02.1015 (Annexure C-2), the OP Bank took no steps to investigate into the same and wrongfully raised an invoice in respect of the said transactions whereby the OP Bank demanded payment of Rs.50,576.20 from the complainant. The complainant intimated the OP Bank of the same vide email dated 16.01.2015 and requested for correction of the invoice. In response, the OP Bank sent an email dated 17.01.2015 whereby the complainant was asked to make payments excluding the fraudulent amount. In pursuance of the same, the complainant cleared all dues in respect of the above-mentioned credit card on 27.01.2015, which is clearly reflected in the Credit Card Statement dt. 08.02.2015 (Annexure C-7). The OP Bank continued to raise bills thereafter, which included dues in respect of the disputed amount. The complainant again objected, vide his email dated 25.02.2015, but the OP Bank continued raising incorrect bills. Thereafter, to the shock and dismay of the complainant, on 09.04.2015, the OP Bank illegally deducted an amount of Rs.18490/- from the savings account no. 1952000403110271 of the complainant without any prior intimation. The complainant had been maintaining a regular balance for his day-to-day expenses in the above-mentioned account maintained with the OP Bank, and had to face financial hardship on account of the unfair and illegal practice of the OP Bank in illegally withdrawing funds from the account of the complainant. The complainant sent another email dated 13.05.2015 (Annexure C-9) to the OP Bank disputing the said illegal deduction on the part of the OP Bank and requested for refund of the money deducted illegally by the bank and some remaining dues to the tune of Rs. 19,225.08. However, no response was given by the OP Bank. Since no action was taken by the OP Bank in respect of the email dated 13.05.2015 (Annexure C-9) disputing the above-mentioned illegal deduction by the OP Bank, the complainant sent repeated reminders vide emails dated 28.06.2015, 27.08.2015 and 03.09.2015 (Annexure C-10 Colly.) and also made several phone calls but to no avail and on the other hand, instead of resolving the issue, the employees of the OP Bank threatened to report the name of the complainant to Credit Bureau such as CIBIL, which would adversely affect the Credit Record of the complainant. Seeing no action on the part of the OP Bank, the complainant filed a Complaint before the Banking Ombudsman, Chandigarh vide email dated 20.07.2016. The said complaint was disposed of by the Banking Ombudsman after hearing the complainant, and an intimation of the disposal of the complaint was sent to the complainant vide email dated 14.09.2016. No detailed order was passed by the Banking Ombudsman. It was only after the OP Bank received Notice of the complaint filed by the complainant before the Banking Ombudsman (Annexure C-13), that the OP Bank took any kind of action on the case of the complainant and asked the complainant, for the very first time, on 19.08.2016, to submit proof of intimation to the Police of the fraudulent transactions. On this belated request on the part of the OP Bank for a copy of the intimation given to the Police, the complainant visited PS Parao and requested for a copy of the complaint submitted by him. The complainant was not provided with a copy of his complaint by the Police but was provided with a Certificate dated 22.08.2016 by the Police to the effect that he had made a complaint in respect of the fraudulent transactions mentioned above on 03.01.2015 (Annexure C-14). The complainant submitted the same, along with the complaint given to the Police by the complainant, to the OP Bank vide his emails dated 22.08.2016 and 25.08.2016 (Annexure C-15 Colly.). It is pertinent to mention here that initially, the Certificate issued by the Police did not contain the particulars of the Credit Card in respect of which fraudulent transactions had been carried out. After discussing the same with an employee (Manager, Head Office, Credit Card Division) of the OP Bank, the complainant sought the details from the Police, which were entered by the Police in the above-mentioned Certificate (Annexure C 14). Finally, after delaying for more than 18 months, and only after the complainant filed a complaint before the Banking Ombudsman, as mentioned above, the OP Bank took some action on the case of the complainant by raising a claim with its Insurer, and informed the complainant vide email dated 20.12.2016 that a surveyor had been appointed in his case. Thereafter, the Insurer of the OP Bank again requested the employees of the OP Bank to provide a copy of the complaint made to the Police in respect of the above-mentioned fraudulent transactions dated 02.01.2015. The employees of the OP Bank, who had already been provided with the Certificate dated 22.08.2016 and 22.08.2016 (Annexure C-15) from PS Parao, did not even bother to read the email from the Insurance Company, and instead forwarded the same to the complainant vide email dated 21.03.2017. The complainant, hoping to get redressal of his grievance, once again provided the copy of the above-mentioned certificate vide email to the OP Bank on 23.03.2017. Seeing no action on the part of the OP Bank, the complainant also sent a reminder email dated 28.04.2017 to the OP Bank. The OP Bank issued a false and frivolous Legal Notice to the complainant dated 17.07.2017, vide which the OP Bank made an illegal demand of Rs.99,058.73, along with finance charges, late payment charges, over-limit and other charges w.e.f. 05.07.2017 in respect of the above-mentioned Credit Card. Another similar Demand Notice dated 08.06.2018 was issued to the complainant about a year later. Thereafter, the complainant received an email dated 28.07.2017 (Annexure C-19) from the OP Bank, with the statement "Please go through the trailing mail and provide the same on priority basis within 48 hours." The Complainant was shocked to find that the Insurer of the OP Bank had repudiated the Claim on the absolutely erroneous and arbitrary ground that the intimation of the fraud was received by the Police on 22.08.2016, despite the fact that the copy of the Certificate dated 22.08.2016 (Annexure C-14) provided to the OP Bank by the complainant clearly mentions the date of the Complaint as 03.01.2015. The complainant explained the mistake on the part of the OP Bank's Insurer vide his emails dated 01.08.2017 and 20.10.2017 (Annexure C-20 Colly.) to the OP Bank, in addition to numerous telephonic conversations with employees of the OP Bank. Despite the best efforts of the complainant, the employees of the OP Bank, in order to wriggle out of their obligations and to pass the buck on to the complainant, sent an email dated 27.10.2017 (Annexure C-22), requesting that a copy of the FIR/intimation to the Police be sent to them by the complainant. Finally, the OP Bank, through the Manager at its Corporate Office, sent an email dated 10.11.2017 (Annexure C-23), taking the false stand that the complainant had not provided copy of the FIR despite repeated requests. The OP Bank also took the stand that since its Insurer had closed the claim raised by the OP Bank, the complainant's case stood closed, and the complainant was liable to make payments illegally demanded by the OP Bank, despite the fact that the OP Bank has made no attempt at all to investigate the dispute raised by the complainant, and the complainant has been running from pillar to post to obtain redressal of his grievance since 03.01.2015. The complainant filed a complaint before the Banking Ombudsman, Chandigarh vide email dated 06.09.2018. However, the said complaint was erroneously disposed of by the Banking Ombudsman vide email dated 03.10.2018 wrongly stating that the said matter had already been dealt with. Vide complaint/clarification dated 22.10.2018, the complainant clarified that the complaint was different from his earlier complaint. However, once again, the complainant's case was not considered by the Banking Ombudsman and was rejected vide email dated 02.11.2018. Hence, the present complaint.
3.           Upon notice, the OPs appeared and filed written version and raised preliminary objections with regard to maintainability, cause of action, not come with clean hands and suppressed the material facts, locus standi and time barred etc. On merits, while admitting the factual matrix of the case with regard to the fact that complaint with regard to fraudulent transactions in respect of credit card of the complainant was received by the OPs, it has been stated that OPs did their all possible measures available with the bank to resolve the alleged dispute of the complainant and they followed up with the Insurance Company even for the resolution of the case of the complainant, but the complainant has failed to provide original copy of FIR/Police com plaint dated 03.01.2015 for onward submission to the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, which causes the rejection of the claim. The OPs contacted the complainant through telephone and informed him that as a service gesture bank is ready to waive the charges levied on the total disputed amount of Rs.48,088.88 Ps. subject to the deposit of the principal amount by him and the complainant had not paid his outstanding Credit Card dues since May, 2015 and due to non payment, the Credit Card account slipped into NPA category on 08.09.2015 with present outstanding as on 08 12.2019 as Rs.2,79,917.52 Ps.      The complainant reported about the two disputed transactions of Rs 28,000/-and Rs.20,088.88Ps. dated 02.01.2015 vide Transaction Dispute Form dated 02.01.2015. Both these transactions took place through presenting the Credit Card and the Card was physically swiped at merchant establishment to perform the transactions. Such transaction occurred by entering Credit Card PIN, which is known to card holder only. On the receipt of the complaint, transaction charge slip retrieval request was raised with VISA. The Acquiring Bank of the merchant rejected the retrieval request, rather provided the copy of charge slip which was sent to the complainant alongwith Letter dated 10.02.2015. On the basis of the Charge slips provided by the Acquirer Bank, Insurance Claim was lodged with M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited to recover the loss occurred due to the above mentioned disputed transactions. For an early settlement of the claim, Credit Card Division had sent several mails to M/s. Oriental Insurance Company Limited. As a matter of fact, monthly invoices get generated by the system as per the transactions done through a Credit Card. As these transactions got initiated through the Credit Card of the complainant, the amount has been correctly included in the Credit Card account statement. Bank debited the amount of Rs.18,490/- from the SB Account No.1952000403110271 of the complainant on 09.04.2015 towards outstanding credit card dues and the same was done under right of set-off available with the bank.  Since the complainant was not paying his Credit Card dues, his Credit Card account slipped into NPA category on 08.09.2015, and consequently it affected the credit history of the card holder and same was reported to CICs. The complainant had also given complaint to Banking Ombudsman, Chandigarh vide Complaint dated 20.07.2016 regarding the above mentioned two transactions and on receiving the copy of the complaint by the OPs, the same was replied by them vide their Letter dated 19.08.2016. As per the attached liability letter 102, it proves that Bank raised the retrieval request with VISA resolve online, which was rejected by the Acquirer Bank on 10.02.2015 with submission of documents. A letter was also sent on the registered address of the complainant vide E-mail dated 26.02.2015. It is self-explanatory from Annexure C4 enclosed with the complaint letter of the complainant. As per attached Credit Card User Guide (Para 9 d) which was sent to the complainant alongwith the Credit Card, it is made stipulation as "The card holder must confirm to PNB in writing immediately after reporting the loss/theft/misuse to the Police. A copy of the police complaint/FIR must accompany the written confirmation". However, the complainant had not shared the copy of FIR with the OPs. It is further submitted that in the absence of police complaint a transaction cannot be treated as fraudulent and the same is not eligible for invocation of claim with the Insurance Company to recover the loss, if any. Insurance claim is admissible only, if the complainant lodges an FIR/Police complaint within two of the fraudulent use of his Credit Card. On receipt of the complaint through Banking Ombudsman vide E-mail dated 17.08.2016, the OPs submitted their reply on the basis of the above facts vide their Letter and E-mail dated 19.08.2016. The Banking Ombudsman decided the complaint of the complainant in favour of the OPs and the complainant was advised to submit a copy of FIR with the Bank.
4.           Further the complainant shared a copy of FIR with the OPs vide his E-mail dated 22.08.2016. On receipt of copy of the FIR, the OPs have lodged the claim of the complainant with the Insurance Company on 30.08.2016 to recover the loss occurred due to the above mentioned disputed transactions. However, after regular follow up with Insurance Company, M/s. Oriental Insurance Company vide their mail dated 28.07.2018 rejected the claim stating that as per Policy terms and conditions, FIR should be lodged within 48 hours from the occurrence of the disputed transaction; whereas in this case, the complainant submitted the copy of Letter dated 22.08.2016 of the Police Station-Parao, District Ambala stating that the complainant had lodged the complaint vide 3-Dasti dated 03.01.2015 regarding disputed transaction of Rs.48,000/-in his credit card No 4197890000654292. It was concluded by the insurance company that it could not be proved that FIR was lodged within 48 hours as per the policy terms and conditions. The mail received from the Oriental Insurance Company Limited was forwarded to the complainant for submission of the original copy of FIR dated 03.01.2015 and despite several mails sent to the complainant, he did not provide the original copy                     of FIR or Police complaint to the OPs and in the absence of the same, the said claim was closed by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited vide their mail dated 11.09.2017. Accordingly the complainant had been intimated the fate of the insurance claim vide email dated 10.11.2017.  Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by the OP and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with costs.
5.           Rejoinder was filed by the complainant controverting the contents of written reply of the OPs.
6.           Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of the complainant as Annexure CW1/A alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 and C-27 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant. Learned counsel for the OPs tendered affidavit of Jitender, Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Branch Model, Town, Sonipat as  Annexure OP-W1/A alongwith documents Annexure OP-1 to OP-4 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.
7.           We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the case file.
8.           Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that despite the fact that information regarding fraudulent transactions carried out through the credit card was given to the police on the very first day i.e. 03.01.2015, document/certificate in respect of which was also delivered to the OPs, as and when asked for, yet, on account of negligence on the part of the OPs, his case was rejected by the insurance company, thereby causing him financial loss and mental agony and harassment.
9.           On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs submitted that since the complainant failed to prove that FIR was lodged within 48 hours as per the policy terms and conditions and  the email received from the Oriental Insurance Company Limited was forwarded to the complainant for submission of the original copy of FIR dated 03.01.2015 and despite several mails sent to the complainant, he did not provide the same, as such, in the absence of the same, his case was rightly closed by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, as the complainant had not proved about the alleged cheating and fraud played with him through using his Credit Card of PNB.
10.           Since, the entire stand of the OPs for rejection of case of the complainant is that he failed to prove that FIR with regard to the fraudulent transaction was lodged within 48 hours, as such, the moot question which falls for consideration before this Commission is as to whether, the complainant has been able to prove that he lodged claim with the police within a period of 48 hours or not? It may be stated here that admittedly the said fraudulent transactions took place through the credit card in question on 02.01.2015. It is coming out from the record that the complainant vide letter dated 03.01.2015, Annexure C-1 intimated the said fact to the SHO, Parao, Ambala and request was made by him to investigate the matter. Information regarding the said fraudulent transaction was given by the complainant to the OPs also vide email dated 03.01.2015, Annexure C-2. Alongwith the said email, the complainant also submitted the transaction dispute form. Thereafter, the OPs sent letter dated 10.02.2015, alongwith transaction documents, Annexure C-4, (pages 31 to 33) which shows that the said fraudulent transactions have been carried out at Syndicate Bank, MS VESTEL METAL, MORABAD, for an amount of Rs.28,000/- and 20,088/-. However, from the naked eyes, it can easily be adjudged that the signatures of the customers thereon are not matching. This fact was informed by the complainant to the OPs vide letter dated 28.02.2015 (page 35). It is further coming out from the record that thereafter, the OPs raised bill amount of Rs.50576.20 in respect of the credit card in question, to which the complainant objected by way of writing email dated 16.01.2015, Annexure C-6, stating therein that since the credit card in question has suffered fraudulent transaction, as such, correct bill may be raised. In response thereto, the OPs vide email dated 17.01.2015, Annexure C-6  informed the complainant to deposit the billed amount, after excluding the fraudulent amount and that once settled, the same will be waived off with charges. Resultantly, the complainant paid an amount of Rs.2300/- against an amount of Rs.2206.42 i.e. Rs.93.58 in excess. However, thereafter, as per the complainant, an amount of Rs.18,490/- was deducted by the OPs from his saving account. Under those circumstances, the complainant vide email dated 13.05.2015, Annexure C-9 requested the OPs to refund the entire amount deducted alongwith redemption of reward points i.e. totalling Rs.19,225.08 paisa followed by reminder email dated 28.01.2015, Annexure C-10, 27.08.2015, 03.09.2015 and 20.07.2016, Annexure C-13. Thereafter, the complainant vide email dated 25.08.2016, Annexure C-15. forwarded the copy of police report lodged by him with regard to the said fraudulent transactions to the OPs, followed by emails dated 20.01.2017 and  09.02.2017, Annexure C-16,  yet, it was always informed to him by the OPs that his case has been assigned to the insurance company, which is awaited. However, without responding to the said emails, the facility of credit card was withdrawn by the OPs. Thereafter, the OPs served legal notice dated 17.07.2017, Annexure C-18, upon the complainant to pay an amount of Rs.99,058/- within 15 days.  It is further coming out from the record that thereafter, the claim of the complainant was rejected by the insurance company vide email dated 28.07.2017, Annexure C-19 on the ground that FIR was  lodged only on 22.08.2016 which is well beyond from the date of incidence, 02.01.2015 which is beyond 48 hours.
11.           It may be stated here that we have gone through the contents of the document/certificate dated 22.08.2016, Annexure C-14 having been issued by the Police Station, Ambala, wherein, it has been clearly mentioned that complaint with regard to fraudulent transaction in respect of the credit card in question was lodged by the complainant on 03.01.2015 i.e. on the very next day. As such, under those circumstances, the claim of the complainant was wrongly rejected by the OPs, while placing reliance on email dated 28.07.2017, Annexure C-19 having been sent by the insurance company to the OPs. Whereas, on the other hand, had the OPs been diligent enough and had they gone through the contents of the document/certificate dated 22.08.2016, Annexure C-14 having been issued by the Police Station, Ambala, wherein, it has been clearly mentioned that complaint with regard to fraudulent transaction in respect of the credit card in question was lodged by the complainant to them on 03.01.2015 i.e. on the very next day, the matter would have been different.  
12.           It is therefore held that since the complainant has proved on record that he has lodged complaint with the police on the very next day of the fraudulent transactions through his credit card i.e. on 03.01.2015 as such, rejection of his case on the ground that he failed to do so within 48 hours, being devoid of merit is rejected. The OPs, therefore by deducting an amount of Rs.18,490/- have committed deficiency in service.
13.           Now coming to the plea taken by the OPs to the effect that since the credit card in question operates only when PIN/code is entered therein and such transaction occurred by entering Credit Card PIN, which is known to card holder only, as such, the complainant failed to prove that it was a fraudulent transaction, it may be stated here that not a single document has been placed on record by the Ops to prove that they conducted any investigation in the matter, to prove that the said fraudulent transaction took place on account of negligence of the complainant. On the other hand, it is evident that the signatures on the merchant order slips provided by the OP Bank vide letter dated 10.02.2015 (Annexure C-4) did not match with the signatures of the complainant; secondly, the signatures on the two slips did not even match with each other; and thirdly, the fraudulent transactions were made at Moradabad, while the complainant was in Ambala, and at the same time, the OPs have failed to prove that the complainant at the relevant time was at Moradabad.  In this view of the matter, bald plea taken by the OPs in this regard stands rejected.
14.           As far as objection taken regarding limitation is concerned, it may be stated here that if the period of two years are counted from the date of receipt of email dated 10.11.2017, Annexure C-23, vide which it was informed to the complainant that his claim has been rejected by the insurance company, as such, this complaint having been filed in 1^st October 2019 is well within limitation. Thus, the objection taken by the OPs that this complaint is time barred is rejected.
15.           In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby partly allow the present complaint against the OPs. The OPs jointly and severally are directed as under:-
    1. To reimburse the amount of Rs.18,490/- to the complainant alongwith interest @4% p.a. from the date of deduction thereof from his saving account onwards till realization.
    2. To pay Rs.3,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant.
    3. To pay Rs.2,000/- as litigation expenses.

                   The OPs are further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions within the period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, failing which the OPs shall pay interest @ 5% per annum on the awarded amount besides litigation expenses, for the period of default, till realisation. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties concerned as per rules.  File be annexed and consigned to the record room.

 Announced on: 19.10.2022.

 

 

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)  (Ruby Sharma)               (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                         Member                       President