Bihar

StateCommission

CC/1/2016

G.K. Industries and Ors - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Punjab National Bank and Others - Opp.Party(s)

Sanjay Kumar

09 Jan 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
BIHAR, PATNA
FINAL ORDER
 
Complaint Case No. CC/1/2016
 
1. G.K. Industries and Ors
G.K. Industries through its Proprietor, Manish Kumar, son of Surendra Prasad, R/O- Mohalla- Salempur, Gola road, Barh, PO, PS, Barh, Dist- Patna, Pin-803213
Patna
Bihar
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Punjab National Bank and Others
The Punjab National Bank through its Chairman having its office at Bikaji cama Palace, New Delhi-7
New Delhi
New Delhi
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Shailesh Kumar Sinha PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Upendra Jha MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Renu Sinha MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 09 Jan 2017
Final Order / Judgement

ORDER

Date of order:  11-01-2017

S.K.Sinha,President 

                  Complainant claims total sum of Rs. 60,76,075/- (Rupees Sixty Lakh Seventy Six thousand and seventy five) on account of not getting imported pulse from different business Enterprises even though payments were made to those businessmen for more than twenty seven lakh as detailed in paragraph 12 of the complaint the payments were made through the brokers as such the criminal case filed against them as well as business Enterprises as detail in paragraph 13 of  complaint. The broker namely Harish Kumar Gupta also filed criminal case against the complainants engaged in running the business under the name and style of  M/s G.K. Industries. The complainant No. 2 is proprietor of the complainant No. 1 who obtained loan from the bank with a cash credit limit from and also obtained insurance cover from the opposite party Insurance company.

        We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant as also Opposite Parties and perused the complaint we find that the complaint suffered from vagueness mis joinder of the cause of action as also no details of lapses committed by the opposite party bank or the insurance company. It is also alleged in the complaint that bank has proceeded for recovery of its outstanding due and invoked provisions of SERFESSI Act. No specific allegations against the Opposite parties including the insurance company are made so as to find consumer dispute. Moreover admittedly the complainant are carrying commercial transaction for profit the business is carried out not by means of self employment for the livelihood.

          The Opposite Parties filed separate reply have denied the claim without any foundational facts.

                 For the reasons and discussions above we find that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on in facts as such not fit for its admission.

               In the result, the complaint stands dismissed.     

 

Renu Sinha                                             Upendra Jha                      S.K.Sinha

Member (F)                                         Member (M)                     President

 

 

 

 

 

           Agam                                                                                                                                                           

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Shailesh Kumar Sinha]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Upendra Jha]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Renu Sinha]
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.