Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Rama Walia v. U.t.i. Technology Services Ltd. & Anr

Rama Walia v. U.t.i. Technology Services Ltd. & Anr

(National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi)

Revision Petition No. 1233/2014 | 11-04-2016

The broad issue raised in the present Revision Petition, viz., whether the Unit Trust of India was justified in terminating the Rajlakshmi Unit Scheme, 1992 and thus depriving the unit holders of the benefits of the said Scheme, is no longer The same issue came up for res integra. consideration before the Honble Delhi High Court in , Writ Petition (Civil) No. 5943 of 2000 filed by one Gaganmeet Kaur through her natural guardian. The High Court, vide order dated 17.08.2005, relying on a decision of the Orissa High Court, which in turn had relied on a decision of the Honble Supreme Court in , had dismissed the Writ SLP (Civil) No. CC 4320 of 2002 Petition. Against the said order, a Letters Patent Appeal, being , was filed LPA No. 2452 of 2005 by the Writ Petitioner, in which an alternative prayer, seeking a direction to the UTI to refund the amount invested by the Appellant in that case along with interest @ 15.5% per annum was made. However, the said LPA was dismissed by the High Court vide order dated 08.02.2006. Still not being satisfied, the Writ Petitioner carried the matter to the Honble Supreme Court but without -1- success, as vide order dated 09.05.2006 her Special Leave Petition, being SLP (Civil) No. 7921 of , was dismissed. 2006 In the light of the said orders, the plea of the Petitioners Authorized Representative that the said issue has been decided in her favour by a decision of the Bombay High Court, cannot be accepted. We may note that while dealing with the same Scheme, this Commission vide order dated

22.11.2011 in , had also Vijay Shakti v. Unit Trust of India & Anr, I (2012) CPJ 346 (NC) come to the conclusion that the UTI was justified in terminating the said Scheme and as such termination having been given wide publicity, the unit holders could not be heard to say that they were not aware of the termination of the said scheme and were entitled to the benefits thereunder. For the aforesaid reasons, the Revision Petition fails and is dismissed accordingly, with no order as to costs. ......................J D.K. JAIN PRESIDENT ...................... M. SHREESHA MEMBER

Advocate List
Bench
  • MR. D.K. JAIN, PRESIDENT
  • MRS. M. SHREESHA, MEMBER
Eq Citations
  • LQ/NCDRC/2016/43
Head Note

CONSUMER PROTECTION — DEFECTIVE GOODS, SERVICES, GUARANTEE AND WARRANTY — DEFECTIVE GOODS/SERVICES — Termination of scheme — Termination of Rajlakshmi Unit Scheme, 1992 by Unit Trust of India (UTI) — Whether justified — Held, termination having been given wide publicity, unit holders could not be heard to say that they were not aware of termination of said scheme and were entitled to benefits thereunder