Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd vs Surinder Singh Ajit Singh Johar on 13 September, 2011

  
 
 
 
 
 
 STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
  
 
 
 







 



 
   
   
   


   
     
     
     

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
    
   
    
     
     

CIRCUIT BENCH AT NAGPUR
    
   
    
     
     

5 TH FLOOR, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING NO. 1
    
   
    
     
     

CIVIL LINES, NAGPUR-440 001
    
   
  
  
   

 
  
 
  
   
   

  
  
 
  
   
   
     
     
     
       
       
       

First Appeal No. RE/67/2009
      
     
      
       
       

(Arisen
      out of Order Dated 27/08/2009 in Case No. CC/09/493 of District )
      
     
    
     

 
    
   
    
     
     

 
    
   
    
     
     
       
       
       
         
         
         

1.

H.D.F.C. BANK LTD.

THROUGH ITS MANAGER MILESTONE WARDHA ROAD NAGPUR 10 ...........Appellant(s) Versus

1. SURINDER SINGH AJIT SINGH JOHAR R/O WARDHAMANNAGAR NAGPUR AND SHOP NO 4 HIMALAYA SOCIETY JAGJIVAN RAM MANDIR NAGPUR ...........Respondent(s)   BEFORE:

   
Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole PRESIDING MEMBER   HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL MEMBER   HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM MEMBER   PRESENT:
None ......for the Appellant   None ......for the Respondent ORDER (Delivered Date On:-13/09/2011) PER SHRI S.M. SHEMBOLE, HON'BLE PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER.
This revision is directed against the order dated 27/8/09 passed by the District Forum, Nagpur in CC No.493/09 allowing interim application directing the opponents/Revision Petitioner Bank to hand over the possession of vehicle within 24 hours on receipt of a cheque of Rs.74,412/- etc. The Revision Petitioner as well as Respondent and their respective counsels are absent. The record reflects that the parties are absent since long. Therefore we have no opportunity to hear the parties.
We have perused the copy of impugned order,  copies of interim application and other documents. We find no infermity or any illegality in the impugned order. The record reflects that the District Consumer Forum has rightly passed the impugned order in the facts of the case. Hence this Revision Petition being devoid of any merit, deserves to be dismissed. Therefore, we pass the following order.
                                                         
ORDER
1.

Revision Petition stands dismissed.

2. No order as to costs.

   

[ Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole] PRESIDING MEMBER   [ HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL] MEMBER   [ HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM] MEMBER