Andhra Pradesh Court February 2003 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Manager, Lic Mutual Fund Vs. Gudipudi Ramaiah
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
Dr. (Mrs.) Mamata Lakshmanna, Member: 1. This appeal is filed by the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 in C.D. No. 34/1996 on the file of District Forum, Prakasam at Ongole. 2. The complaint was filed to direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 17,582/- as compensation and also issue share certificates of Dhana Vikas-I. The complainant sent a demand draft dated 9.2.1993 for Rs. 4,988/- for issue of 500 share certificates of Dhana Vikas-I Mutual Fund floated by opposite parties. He neither received the mutual fund unit certificates nor was the amount refunded, hence he sustained loss in foregoing the further benefits, hence the complaint. Opposite Party No. 2 filed its counter and denied the allegations stating that the certificates were despatched on 13.7.1993 by registered post and hence there was no deficiency. The District Forum however found deficiency in service and directed opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 to pay Rs. 4,988/- with interest at 10 per cent per annum from 9.2.1993 till the date o...
Aptech Ltd. Vs. A. Srinivasa Rao
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President: 1. The opposite parties 1 to 3 in C.D. 298/1998 on the file of District Forum, Visakhapatnam are the appellants. The case of the complainants is that they joined the institute of opposite parties in Higher Diploma in Software Engineering and accordingly paid Rs. 30,600/- towards various heads of fee to the fourth opposite party. As per the prospectus released by the first appellant the students have to undergo extensive training for acquiring special knowledge and skills in computers, but the opposite parties failed to provide any infrastructure facilities including equipment, faculty course, etc. The complainants have practically wasted their precious time of over one year. Hence the complainants approached the District Forum for refund of fee, etc., paid by them. Same orders were passed on 3.2.2003 by the State Commission in (1) Aptech Ltd. v. D. Hari Prasad Reddy, FA No. 236/2000, (2) Aptech Ltd. v. P. Chitanya, FA No. 238/2000, (3) Aptech Ltd. v. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›