TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 1217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nant - Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - HELD THAT:- The petitioner company was ready to compensate the complainant for this inadvertent mistake. In view of the said admission of negligence by the petitioner and having regard to the quantum of compensation awarded (₹ 20,000/-) this is not a fit case for our interference in revisionary jurisdiction. As the powers of a Telegraph Authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R This application has been filed by the petitioner for restoration of the revision petition and for recall of order dated 04.02.2014, vide which the said revision petition was dismissed for non-prosecution as well as in default. For the reasons stated in the application, it is allowed; order dated 04.02.2014 is recalled; and the revision petition is restored to its original position. Revi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... complaint, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in General Manager, Telecom v. M. Krishnan Anr. (2009) 8 SCC 481). However, subsequently, vide a letter dated 24.01.2014, the Government of India, Ministry of Communication IT, while responding to the communication received from the Secretary, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of West Bengal on 07.10.2013, in relatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
