Maharashtra

StateCommission

A/10/1139

STATE BANK OF INDIA - Complainant(s)

Versus

SHRI UMEDILAL M SHAH - Opp.Party(s)

A ABHYANKAR

21 Jul 2011

ORDER

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
 
First Appeal No. A/10/1139
(Arisen out of Order Dated 26/08/2010 in Case No. 2241/09 of District Sangli)
 
1. STATE BANK OF INDIA
SANGLI BRANCH P O BOX NO 161 NEAR GANPATI MANDIR SANGLI
SANGLI
MAHARASHTRA
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. SHRI UMEDILAL M SHAH
SHREYAS LALE PLOT NEAR VYANKATESH TEMPLE SANGLI
SANGLI
MAHARASHTRA
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.B.Mhase PRESIDENT
 Hon'ble Mr. S.M.Shembole MEMBER
 Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kawde MEMBER
 
PRESENT:A ABHYANKAR , Advocate for the Appellant 1
 
ORDER

Per Justice Mr. S.B. Mhase, Hon’ble President :

          Ld. Counsel Mr. U.M. Abhyankar present alongwith Mrs. Bhatia, Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Sangli. He states that Mrs. Bhatia is an authorized officer on behalf of the Bank to deal with this consumer complaint and appeal.  Ld. Counsel on instruction from Mrs. Bhatia states that the appellant has settled the claim and appellant be granted leave to withdraw this appeal.  Appellant has filed pursis/memo to that effect.  Respondent is not present.  Therefore,  contents in the pursis/memo cannot be confirmed.  But since appellant desires to withdraw appeal, we hereby grant leave to withdraw appeal.  Appeal is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn.

          In this appeal, there is delay in filing appeal and therefore, appellant has filed delay condonation application.   But as appellant is withdrawing appeal and as leave to withdraw has been granted, the delay condonation application stands disposed of as withdrawn and/or not pressed.

          As the appeal  is withdrawn, the order of District Forum stands confirmed and therefore, amount which was deposited by the appellant at the time of filing appeal under section 15 proviso will have to be paid to the respondent(Complainant).  However, Complainant is not present and appellant states that the claim has been settled.  In the absence of Complainant, Commission is not in a position to know as to whether claim has been settled or not.  Therefore,  it is clarified that if the appellant produces the Complainant and Complainant given no objection to release amount in favour of appellant, then only amount be paid/returned to appellant.  The appellant may produce also notarized no objection and/or no objection through the advocate of the Complainant so as to get this amount.  Therefore,  Registrar shall release amount in favour of the appellant only on satisfaction that Complainant has no objection to release amount. If such no objection is not produced by appellant, the Registrar shall pay this amount to Complainant after period to file revision  to National Commission is over. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

                              O R D E R

          In view of the withdrawal of appeal, delay condonation application  stands disposed of.

Pronounced dated 21st July 2011.

 

 
 
[Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.B.Mhase]
PRESIDENT
 
[Hon'ble Mr. S.M.Shembole]
MEMBER
 
[Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kawde]
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.