Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.25 seconds)
Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. vs Prakash Chand on 18 September, 2015 cites

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd vs Prakash Chand And Ors on 18 October, 2011

In view of our above discussions, as recorded above, by setting aside the order of District Forum Ferozepur dated 23.04.2012, we accept the first appeal no.1233 of 2012 titled as "Mahindra & Mahindra Limited Vs. Parkash Chand and others" and we also accept the first appeal no.1546 of 2012 titles as "Imperial Motors Vs. Parkash Chand & others" by directing that this case stands transferred to District Forum Bathinda, which has the requisite jurisdiction to try the complaint. The District Forum Bathinda shall procure the presence of the parties before it and then decide the case denovo in accordance with law. The registry is directed to send the case file to District Forum Bathinda within 30 days period.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 5 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

M/S. Sonic Surgical vs National Insurance Company Ltd on 20 October, 2009

It was again brought to workshop at Bathinda, which gave rise to the present dispute between the parties. Neither the vehicle was purchased by making the payment at Ferozepur by the complainant nor the vehicle was repaired or its engine replaced at Ferozepur by OP no.2. Now, we have to adjudicate this point as to mere location of branch within the jurisdiction of Ferozepur would clothe the District Forum Ferozepur with the jurisdiction to try the complaint. The Apex Court has settled the controversy in "Sonic Surgical Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd." 2010(1)CLT-252, wherein it has been held that expression "Branch Office" has defined in Section 17(2) of the Act and it means the branch office, where cause of action has arisen. The complainant has not pleaded the facta-probanda in the complaint giving rise to cause of action within the territorial jurisdiction of District Forum Ferozepur. We cannot presume it First Appeal No.1233 of 2012 11 unless and until it is categorically pleaded by the complainant or proved on the record. Consequently, we are of this view that District Forum Ferozepur has failed to appreciate this controversy on this point, despite a specific objection raised by OPs before it in this regard. Neither the vehicle was purchased at Ferozepur nor it was repaired at Ferozepur nor its engine was replaced at Ferozepur, nor the dispute of parking charges arose at Ferozepur as such no part of cause of action accrued to the complainant within the territorial jurisdiction of Ferozepur. The District Forum which lacked the territorial jurisdiction should have returned the complaint to the complainant for its presentation before proper Forum. The District Forum assumed the territorial jurisdiction, which was not vested in it by law.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 376 - Full Document

M/S Imperial Motors vs Parkash Chand on 16 August, 2013

In view of our above discussions, as recorded above, by setting aside the order of District Forum Ferozepur dated 23.04.2012, we accept the first appeal no.1233 of 2012 titled as "Mahindra & Mahindra Limited Vs. Parkash Chand and others" and we also accept the first appeal no.1546 of 2012 titles as "Imperial Motors Vs. Parkash Chand & others" by directing that this case stands transferred to District Forum Bathinda, which has the requisite jurisdiction to try the complaint. The District Forum Bathinda shall procure the presence of the parties before it and then decide the case denovo in accordance with law. The registry is directed to send the case file to District Forum Bathinda within 30 days period.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1