Chennai Court October 2008 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.
The Special Officer TuticorIn District Central Co-operative Bank, Tuti ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Oct-13-2008
N. KANNADASAN J. (Open Court) 1. The appellants are the opposite parties and the respondent is the complainant before the District Forum. 2. The main ground raised in the above appeal is to the effect that the complainant shall avail remedies only by approaching the authorities prescribed under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 and the Consumer Forum does not have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. The law is already settled by this Commission by rejecting the similar contentions in FA.Nos.634/2006 to 636/2006 dt.15.11.2007. By following the above principles this appeal is also dismissed. However, there will be no order as to cost....
Sundar Manager Indus Ind Bank Ltd., Madurai and Another Vs. A. Ganesan
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Oct-12-2008
N. KANNADASAN J. (Open Court) 1. The appellants are the opposite parties and the respondent is the complainant before the District Forum. 2. The complainant has approached the District Forum under the following circumstances: The complainant has availed a loan of Rs.33000/- from the opposite parties under the Hire Purchase Agreement dt.14.7.2001 for the purchase of motorcycle. The guarantor of the complainant has furnished 29 cheques for the monthly instalments payable for every month. According to the complainant even though the entire amount is paid as early as on 7.11.2003, the vehicle was repossessed by the opposite parties claiming that further amount is due and payable by them, and hence the complaint. 3. The opposite party resisted the complaint by contending that several cheques given by the complainant were dishonored and the payments were not made in time and the complainant has not paid either the normal interest or the penal interest, which is governed by the terms of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›