Delhi

South Delhi

CC/38/2022

SNEHA AGGARWAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK - Opp.Party(s)

25 Apr 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II UDYOG SADAN C 22 23
QUTUB INSTITUTIONNAL AREA BEHIND QUTUB HOTEL NEW DELHI 110016
 
Complaint Case No. CC/38/2022
( Date of Filing : 14 Feb 2022 )
 
1. SNEHA AGGARWAL
FLAT NO. S-25, SECTOR-9, ROHINI, NEW DELHI 110085
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK
5 PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI 110001
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  MONIKA A. SRIVASTAVA PRESIDENT
  KIRAN KAUSHAL MEMBER
  UMESH KUMAR TYAGI MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 25 Apr 2022
Final Order / Judgement

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi- 110016

 

Case No.38/2022

 

Ms. Sneh Aggarwal

Venus Apartments

Flat No. S-25,

Sector-9, Rohini,

New Delhi- 110085

….Complainant

Versus

 

Punjab National Bank

Through its AGM/Chief Manager

5, Parliament Street,

New Delhi- 110001

        ….Opposite Party

    

            Date of Institution    :    14.02.2022    

            Date of Order            :    25.04.2022  

Coram:

Ms. Monika A Srivastava, President

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

Sh. U.K. Tyagi, Member

ORDER

 

President: Ms. Monika A Srivastava

 

Complainant has filed the present complaint for seeking direction to be given to OP to issue a ‘no due certificate’ against an entry dated 04.11.1997 amounting to Rs.1,60,594/- and also for damages and compensation to the tune of Rs.2,50,000/- for mental harassment and agony caused to the complainant.

At the outset, it is seen that a similar order in this regard on the same facts between the same parties titled “  Smt. Sneh Aggarwal Vs C.M Bhatia (PNB) & Anr. CC No.218/2017 ”has been passed by Hon’ble District Commission ITO vide order dated 20.09.2018 wherein it was held that the complaint filed before District Commission ITO in the year 2017 was barred by limitation and on merits, it was held that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the OP as alleged by the complainant. It was also stated in the order dated 20.09.2018 that the complainant was dismissed from the service in August 1995 by the disciplinary authority and the matter is pending adjudication before the Hon’ble High Court. An appeal has been filed against the said order of the Hon’ble District Commission ITO and is pending before the Hon’ble State Commission vide appeal no. 510/2018    dated 05.10.2018.

In view of the order of the Hon’ble District Commission passed on the same case between the same parties and also the fact that the matter is pending adjudication before the Hon’ble State Commission, this Commission deems it fit to dismiss the present complaint as not maintainable.

In view of the said facts, the said complaint is dismissed in limine.

 

File be consigned to the record room after giving a copy of the order to the parties as per rules. Order be uploaded on the website.

                                                    

 

 
 
[ MONIKA A. SRIVASTAVA]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ KIRAN KAUSHAL]
MEMBER
 
 
[ UMESH KUMAR TYAGI]
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.