9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (9) TMI 459X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent appeared when this appeal came up for hearing. We have carefully gone through the records and proceed to dispose of the appeal. 2. Mr. Ved Prakash, complainant for short, applied for 25 equity shares offered by LML Limited as right issue. The complainant was stated to have deposited Rs. 125 in cash alongwith application for allotment with Bank of Tokyo Ltd., Sansad Marg, New Delhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was barred by limitation. We find force in this objection. The cause of action, if any, arose in July, 1991 when the complainant submitted the application for the allotment of the shares. The complaint, having been filed in 1995, was barred by limitation. The authority cited by the appellant namely Omega Packaging (P.) Ltd. v. Central Bank of India [1995] CPJ 1 (NC) clearly applies and the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Bank. As the complainant is not a consumer in view of the decision of the Supreme Court the appeal must succeed. The same is allowed and order of the District Forum is set-aside. As a result, the complaint stands dismissed. The parties to bear their own costs through- out. A copy of this order be communicated to both the parties as well as District Forum-II. Appeal allowed. SCL q MAY 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
