Tamil Nadu

Thiruvallur

RBT/CC/73/2022

Ahmed Rizwan - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager,State Bank of India Broadway Branch - Opp.Party(s)

Jaseem Mohammed -C

26 Oct 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
THIRUVALLUR
No.1-D, C.V.NAIDU SALAI, 1st CROSS STREET,
THIRUVALLUR-602 001
 
Complaint Case No. RBT/CC/73/2022
 
1. Ahmed Rizwan
ch
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Branch Manager,State Bank of India Broadway Branch
ch104
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  TMT.Dr.S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI, M.A.,M.L.,Ph.D(Law) PRESIDENT
  THIRU.J.JAYASHANKAR, B.A.,B.L., MEMBER
  THIRU.P.MURUGAN, M.Com, ICWA (Inter), B.L., MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Jaseem Mohammed -C, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 Satheeskumar-OP1, Exparte - OP2, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 26 Oct 2022
Final Order / Judgement

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
THIRUVALLUR

 BEFORE  TMT. Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, M.A.,M.L, Ph.D (Law)                                  .…. PRESIDENT
                 THIRU.J.JAYASHANKAR.B.A.,B.L.,                                                                …..MEMBER-I
                 THIRU P.MURUGAN, M.Com., ICWA(Inter)., B.L.,                                                 ….. MEMBER-II

CC. No.73/2022
THIS TUESDAY, THE 26th  DAY OF OCTOBER 2022

Mr.M.A.Ahmed Rizwan,
No.121, Thambu Chetty Street,
Chennai – 600 001.                                                                                                             ....Complainant.
                                                                                       //Vs//
1.The Branch Manager,
   State Bank of India,
   Broad way Branch, Chennai -600 104.

2.The Branch Manager,
    Kotak Mahindra Bank,
    No.184, 1st Floor, Govindappa Naicken Street,
    Chennai – 600 001.                                                                                                 ....Opposite parties
 
ORDER
PRONOUNCED BY TMT. Dr. S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI,   PRESIDENT.

               The complaint was filed by the complainant U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 alleging deficiency in service against the opposite parties in not transferring the amount along with a prayer to direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- which is yet to be transferred to the 2nd opposite party and to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony, depression and expenses incurred by the complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards cost of the complaint. 
 No representation for the complainant.   1st opposite party alone present. Inspite of sufficient opportunities and information provided by this commission, no written argument was filed by the complainant.   Hence, this commission is of the view that no purpose in keeping the complaint on file.  Hence the consumer complaint is dismissed for non prosecution.  No cost.
This order was pronounced by us in the open Commission on this 26th October 2022. 

   Sd/-                                                       Sd/-                                                        Sd/-    

MEMBER-II                                        MEMBER-I                                             PRESIDENT

 
 
[ TMT.Dr.S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI, M.A.,M.L.,Ph.D(Law)]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ THIRU.J.JAYASHANKAR, B.A.,B.L.,]
MEMBER
 
 
[ THIRU.P.MURUGAN, M.Com, ICWA (Inter), B.L.,]
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.