Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.91 seconds)
Documents citing Mumbai Metropolitan Region ... vs Dena Bank & 4 Ors. on 3 June, 2016

Publi Health Foundation Of India vs Bank Of Maharashtra on 26 June, 2024

22.    There is one more fact which needs mention as urged on behalf of the complainant regarding similar such matters having been dealt with by this Commission, and the complaints having been allowed regarding deficiencies against banks and financial institutions at the behest of complainants who had made similar investments and also at the behest of the present complainant.  The decisions rendered by this Commission and relied upon by the learned counsel for the complainants, are (i) CC/259/2014 Maharashtra Tourism Development Corporation vs. Dena Bank & Ors. decided on 03.06.2016; (ii) CC/947/2015 Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority vs. Dena Bank & Ors. also decided on 03.06.2016; (iii) CC/1363/2015 Mumbai District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Vs. ICICI Bank Ltd. decided on 21.03.2018; (iv) CC/759/2016 PHFI Vs. Dena Bank decided on 01.06.2023 and (v) CC/1185/2016 PHFI Vs. Central Bank of India decided on 16.05.2024.  In all these five cases, similar nature of deficiencies were alleged and the complaints were allowed where also the same preliminary objections had been raised by the learned counsel for the banks and the financial institutions.
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Navshakti Textiles Processor Pvt. Ltd. vs Unitech Ltd. & Anr. on 16 October, 2017

4.      Though the complainant is a private company and not an undertaking of the government, the fact remains that as is evident from its Memorandum and Articles of Association, its main objective to carry on business as manufacturers,  processors, dealers, contractors, etc. for any or all varieties of silks, artificial silks, synthetics, polyster, nyloen, cotton etc. Earning profit by way of investment of money is not a primary objective of the complainant though as an object incidental or ancillary to the attainment of the main objects, the company is authorized to entrust the funds not immediately required, in land, building and through negotiable instruments etc. A reference in this regard can be made to clause B (1) of the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the complainant. Therefore, relying upon the decision of this Commission in Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (supra), I hold that the complainant would be a consumer qua the opposite party in respect of the money it had deposited by way of an FDR with the opposite party.
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1