PADMINI K Vs. NETWORTH STOCK BROKING LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been placed by circulation in terms of Regulation 15 (2) of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005 before us since one of the Members, namely, Dr. P.D. Shenoy, Member has since relinquished charge on expiry of term of appointment.

(2.) The condonation as also review application has been placed before us. After having gone through the application for condonation, review application as also papers annexed therewith, the review application was ordered to be listed for hearing. We have heard Ld. Counsel appearing on both sides.

(3.) The complaint filed by the complainant/petitioner was allowed by the District Forum with certain directions. The said order of the District forum was challenged before the State Commission in appeal and the State Commission allowed the appeal. The complaint was dismissed reserving liberty to the complainant either to avail remedy of arbitration or to approach civil court if so advised. This order was challenged in revision. When the matter came up for hearing on 14.7.2009, the final order was passed on the statement made by the Ld. Counsel for the respondent, which is produced below: