HDFC BANK LTD. Vs. MEENA VAID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the medium of this appeal, the appellant has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court in terms of section 17 of the J&K Consumer Protection Act, 1987 (for short, Act) and has questioned the order dated 16.12.2008 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jammu (for short, State Commission), made in Complaint No. 2908 of 2007, titled as, Meena Vaid Vs. Branch Manager, HDFC Bank , whereby the appellant-Bank has been directed to reimburse a sum of Rs. 2,92,000.00 along with interest @ 8% to the complaint-respondent herein, and her son from 05.11.2006 till final payment is made as also to indemnify them for the insurance cover of Rs. 3.00 lacs, (for short, impugned order), on the grounds taken in the memo of appeal.

(2.) Complainant-respondent herein filed a complaint against the appellant-Bank before the State Commission on 31.07.2007 in terms of section 15 of the Act on the grounds taken in the memo of complaint. Notice was issued to the appellant-Bank and file was posted for 03.09.2007. The complaint came up on 03.09.2007 and also on subsequent dates till 16.12.2008 when the impugned order came to be made at the back of appellant-Bank. The State Commission has not recorded in any of the zimni order that notice was ever served upon the appellant-Bank and has not recorded its satisfaction to the same effect

(3.) In terms of mandate of section 16 of the Act, procedure specified in sections 10, 11 and 12 is to be followed. In the instant case section 11(2) of the Act was applicable. It is profitable to reproduce section 16 and section 11(2) of the Act herein: