MANAGER Vs. BRANCH MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petition, under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act") has been filed against the order of the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai, Circuit Bench at Aurangabad (for Short "the State Commission"), dated 10.08.2018 in Appeal No.815 of 2016, which was filed by the Petitioners against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Aurangabad (for Short "the District Forum"), dated 29.07.2016 in CC No.249 of 2015. By the impugned order, the Appeal against the order of the District Forum was dismissed. The District Forum in its order dated 29.07.2016 after considering the evidence on record, concluded that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Petitioners and issued the following directions:

(2.) It is argued by learned Counsel for the Petitioners that the Petitioners is double jeopardiesed in the sense that they had not only remitted a sum of Rs.1,69,655.77ps. on behalf of the Respondent to the Rental Company which the Respondent had hired while in Switzerland and gave his credit card number to the said Rental Company and had also entered into an agreement with them, but the Petitioners had also been directed to refund to the Complainant the said sum and thus, the Petitioners had suffered double jeopardy.

(3.) Beyond that, no argument has been forwarded on behalf of the Petitioners.