........."The complainant has not disclosed this fact in his complaint and has hidden the relevant fact. Impact of this transition in the payment terms and its processing time as well as return of unused cheques must have been agreed between both parties involved in the transaction and effected upon. "...However, it is apparent that in the process, Opposite Party (OP) has received EMI payment twice for the months of March and April, 2011, but the same was accounted for in statement of account given to the complainant. "Thus, OP (bank) is only deficient on account of receiving double payment of EMI for month of March and April, 2011," the forum said..........
The very purpose of VITALINFO is to provide a platform for wider dissemination of updated information related to and happening of events in and around RBI.
No comments:
Post a Comment