Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.27 seconds)

Nidhaan Overseas Pvt. Ltd vs Dena Bank on 15 February, 2011

13. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the file carefully. The learned counsel for OP No.1 has argued that the complainant is a commercial organization and Letters of Credit (LCs) were obtained by it for commercial purpose and deficiency of which services is alleged by the complainant relates to a commercial activity and therefore complainant would be outside the purview of a consumer to file the present complaint. On the other hand, learned counsel for complainant referred to the cases ; Thukaram Anantha Shet Vs The Manager, Karnataka Bank Ltd. 2009(1)CPC 373 , ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs Quality Foils India (P) Ltd. & Anr. 2008(I)CPC656 & Central Bank of India Vs Om Sons Wires (P) Ltd. 2007(I) CLT 407 and argued that even if the complainant is running business in connection with which the LCs were obtained from OP , the complainant would still be a consumer if there is any deficiency on the part of OP in rendering the service relating to the Letters of credit.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 14 - Cited by 16 - Full Document

Sri Muppidi Eswara Rao S/O Late Satyam vs Icici Bank Limited on 18 January, 2012

10. The appellant availing the loan on 21-09-2002 to the tune of `2,50,000/- on interest @ 11.25 payable in 133 equated monthly installments and repayment of the loan on 24-11-2007 is not disputed. The District Forum returned finding that the respondent bank was negligent in not returning the documents after discharge of the loan by the appellant, basing on the decisions of the Honble National Commission in HDFC vs Santa Sundar Rajan 2008(4)30(NC), Tukaram Anantha Set vs Karnataka BankI(2006)CPJ110 (NC), C.L.Khanna vs Dena BankIV(2005)CPJ 137 (NC), Dosan Chemicals Pvt Ltd vs United Bank of India I(2003)CPJ 214(NC).
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1