https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185302 The Supreme Court held that the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum had jurisdiction to address the complaint regarding the correction of the date of birth on the matriculation certificate. It found that the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission erred in disregarding the Deputy Secretary's report. The Court remitted the case to the District Forum for reconsideration, instructing it to assess the complaint's maintainability, the limitation period issue, and review the Deputy Secretary's report while granting the respondent an opportunity to respond. The parties were to bear their own costs. en-us Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Aug 2016 18:09:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185302 The Supreme Court held that the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum had jurisdiction to address the complaint regarding the correction of the date of birth on the matriculation certificate. It found that the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission erred in disregarding the Deputy Secretary's report. The Court remitted the case to the District Forum for reconsideration, instructing it to assess the complaint's maintainability, the limitation period issue, and review the Deputy Secretary's report while granting the respondent an opportunity to respond. The parties were to bear their own costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185302