GURJEET SINGH Vs. BANK OF PUNJAB LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -THE challenge in these revision petitions is to the order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory, Chandigarh dated 13. 3. 2008. We have heard the Counsel for the Petitioners at length. One of the important conditions of the Bank Guarantee, in question, reads as under:

(2.) RULES 22 of the Punjab Apartment and Property Regulations Act, 1995 is to the following effect:

(3.) KEEPING in view these conditions and important provisions of law, the State Commission was fully justified in taking the view that there was no deficiency on the part of the respondent-Bank or PUDA in not discharging the FDRs, in question, which were given as counter guarantee to the Bank guarantee furnished by the Bank for Balkar Singh in favour of PUDA. The impugned order cannot be faulted on any ground. However, we would like to observe that the transaction in this case relating to furnish of Bank guarantee was for a purely commercial purpose within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (d) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Therefore, strictly speaking, Petitioners could not have invoked the jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora for redressal of their grievance. It may perhaps be possible for the petitioners to seek their remedy through Civil Court or any other appropriate Forum in accordance with law. With these observations, these revision petitions are dismissed. Revision Petitions dismissed.