Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.21 seconds)
Rama Milk Private Ltd. vs Maharashtra State Financial ... on 9 September, 2008 cites

Mahesh Chandra vs Regional Manager, U.P. Financial ... on 12 February, 1992

40. The main issue is whether there is any deficiency in service by the Corporation. Despite of the short-comings and negative action by the complainant, the Corporation in all fairness has given an One Time Settlement offer to the Complainant on 10.10.03 asking the complainant to pay Rs. 7,75,468/- making the offer valid upto 31.10.03. Instead of accepting this offer the Complainant had issued a legal notice alleging unfair trade practice on the part of the Corporation on 27.10.04. We do not find an iota of deficiency on the part of the Corporation in view of the above detailed analysis of the facts and also the recent judgements of the Supreme Court which have distinguished the judgement delivered in Mahash Chandas case (supra) quoted by the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant. Accordingly, this complaint deserves to be dismissed. Hence, dismissed as such. There shall be no orders as to cost.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 278 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document

U.P. Financial Corporation vs Gem Cap (India) Pvt. Ltd. And Ors on 2 March, 1993

14. Learned Counsel has also referred to a case in which the ruling in Mahesh Chandra case was distinguished where it has been made clear that the financial corporations cannot be made to suffer as the loans granted by them had to be recovered vide U.P. Financial Corpn. v. Gem Cap (India) (P) Ltd. Reliance is placed on the following passage in that judgment: (SCC pp. 305-06, para 10)
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 204 - B P Reddy - Full Document
1   2 Next