Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.24 seconds)

M/S. Modi Cements Ltd vs Shri Kuchil Kumar Nandi on 2 March, 1998

In view of these facts and the ratio in Kuchil Kumar Nandi's case the respondent-bank cannot be ordered to pay the expenses allegedly incurred by the petitioner in defending the criminal complaint filed by his erstwhile partner-Venkata Peddy. Sir ce the compensation claimed is relateable to the said endorsement made on the cheque in question, it is also not payable. There is no illegality or jurisdictional error in the order passed by State Commission warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction under Section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Revision petition is, therefore, dismissed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 411 - S P Kurdukar - Full Document
1