NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/3379/2010

BHAGAT FORD - Complainant(s)

Versus

VINOD KUMAR SEHDEV & ORS. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. HARJOT SINGH BEDI

15 Oct 2010

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

NEW DELHI

REVISION PETITION NO. 3379 OF 2010

(Against the Order dated 08/09/2010 in Appeal No. 255/2010 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BHAGAT FORD Through its Aughorized Representative A.B. Motors Pvt. Ltd., 19, Industrial Area, Mohali Mohali Chandigarh	...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. VINOD KUMAR SEHDEV & ORS. House No.5109/2, odern Housing Complex, Mani Marg Chandigarh Chandigarh 2. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. Through its Manager, S.C.O. No.57, Sector 26, Chandigarh Chandigarh 3. MR. SOHAL, SURVEYOR OF THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. S.C.O. No.57, Sector-26 Chandigarh Chandigarh	...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
	HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. GUPTA, PRESIDING MEMBER
	HON'BLE MR. S.K. NAIK, MEMBER

For the Petitioner :

MR. HARJOT SINGH BEDI

For the Respondent :

NEMO

Dated : 15 Oct 2010

ORDER

Order under challenge passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission U.T., Chandigarh in the pending appeal filed by OP No.2/petitioner against the order of District Forum dated 31.5.2010 runs as under: - he operation of the order in terms of Clause 3 and 4 of para No.9 is stayed subject to compliance of order in terms of Clause 1 and 2 of the aforesaid para of the impugned order. The service is complete. Record received. Be put up for arguments on 10.12.2010. In terms of Clause 3 of the Forum order the petitioner is to return to National Insurance Company OP No.1 the excess amount received by it against bill of Rs.1,20,259/-. In terms of Clause 4 the petitioner has been ordered to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- to the respondent No.1/complainant. Operation of both these Clauses 3 & 4 has been stayed subject to compliance of Clauses 1 and 2 of the order in regard to handing over of the repaired car back to respondent No.1 etc. Having heard Shri Bedi, we are not inclined to interfere with the discretion exercised by the State Commission in granting conditional stay in revisional jurisdiction -2- under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.

......................J

K.S. GUPTA

PRESIDING MEMBER

......................

S.K. NAIK

MEMBER