ICICI BANK LTD Vs. CH MOGULAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner alleging therein that the Complainant/Respondent No.1 had failed to prove any deficiency in service on their part and the District Forum has also concluded that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the Petitioners/the Opposite Parties No.2 and 3, yet in violation of Section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the District Forum had passed the order whereby it had directed the Petitioners to reschedule the loan amount taken by the Complainant. It is contended that since the order was violation of the provision of the Act, an Appeal being FA No.717 of 2013 was filed against the order of the District Forum dated 14.02.2013 which was dismissed by the State Commission by the impugned order. The State Commission confirmed the order of the District Forum. It is submitted that the impugned order is contrary to the provisions of the Act.

(2.) Notice of this Revision Petition was sent to the Respondents. However, despite service of notice, none of them appeared and they were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 26.09.2018.

(3.) We have heard the arguments and perused the relevant record.