SYNDICATE BANK V/S ASHOK CHHABRA - Consumer Court Case

NCDRC

RP/4299/2009

ASHOK CHHABRA - Complainant(s)

Versus

SYNDICATE BANK - Opp.Party(s)

MR. RAJIV KUMAR GHAWANA

04 Dec 2009

ORDER

Date of Filing: 19 Nov 2009
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. No. RP/4299/2009
(Against the Order dated 04/08/2009 in Appeal No. 234/2009 of the State Commission Delhi)

1. ASHOK CHHABRA						...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
1. SYNDICATE BANK						...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN ,PRESIDENTHON'BLE MR. B.K. TAIMNI ,MEMBER

For the Appellant :

MR. RAJIV KUMAR GHAWANA

For the Respondent :

NEMO

Dated : 04 Dec 2009

ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended

Highly recommended!

5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended

Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

We agree with the view taken by the State Commission. Finding recorded by the State Commission is a finding of fact, which cannot be interfered with in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. Under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the National Commission, in revision, can interfere with the orders only if it appears that the Authority below has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested or has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.

We find no error/irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction by the State Commission in its impugned order. Dismissed.

......................JASHOK BHANPRESIDENT
......................B.K. TAIMNIMEMBER