First Appeal No. A/10/185 @ MA/10/91 (DELAY) (Arisen out of Order Dated 27/07/2009 in Case No. 290/07 of District Pune). Case: Suvarna Sanjay Jadhav Vs 1. Sai Samarth Associates, Pune and others, 2. Sanjay D. Dapodikar, 3. Shailendra B. Alman, 4. Rupak Balwant Gaikwad, 5. Suresh Kisan Raikar. Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
| Case Number | First Appeal No. A/10/185 @ MA/10/91 (DELAY) (Arisen out of Order Dated 27/07/2009 in Case No. 290/07 of District Pune) |
| Judges | S. B. Mhase (President) & S. R. Khanzode (Judicial Member) |
| Issue | Consumer Law |
| Judgement Date | February 02, 2011 |
| Court | Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission |
Judgment:
S. B. Mhase (President)
-
None present for the appellant. This appeal is directed against the decision in consumer complaint no.290/2007 decided on 27/07/2009 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune. By this order, the complaint which was filed by the appellant was allowed in part and the original opponents/respondent nos.1-5 are jointly and severally directed to refund an amount of '2,50,000/- and an amount of '23,000/- together with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of agreement i.e. from 14/11/2005 onwards till realization thereof by the complainant/appellant. Complainant/appellant was not satisfied with this order and, therefore, preferred this appeal.
-
It appears that there is a delay in preferring the appeal and, therefore, delay condonation application has been submitted being M.A.no.10/91. This appeal was presented to the State Commission on 10/02/2010. However, on 15/02/2010 there is an order sheet signed by the advocate of the appellant wherein date was fixed 23/02/2010. Accordingly, appeal appeared before the State Commission on 23/02/2010. One Mr.Sahil Mahajan-Advocate was present holding for Mr.Parag Shelke-Advocate for the appellant and reported that Mr.Parag Shelke is ill and, therefore, appeal may be adjourned. However, we have noted on that day that the adjournment on the ground of illness of Mr.Parag Shelke cannot be considered because Mr.Parag Shelke has not signed the vakalatnama and it has been signed by Mr.Yuvraj Kakade-Advocate and, therefore, that ground was not a proper ground. Since the appeal appeared for the first time for admission and delay condonation, we imposed cost of '500/- to be paid to Legal Aid account of this Commission and issued notice on delay condonation application r/o.23/03/2010. We directed simultaneously notice through the State Commission and private notice of advocate. In compliance with this order the applicant / appellant should have submitted compilation to the office so as to serve the respondent. However, Office report shows that no such steps were taken by the appellant.
-
Therefore, office listed the matter on 08/03/2010 in order category. It is noted that order dated 23/02/2010 was not complied with and, therefore, directions were given granting time for one week to the appellant to comply with the order dated 23/02/2010. It was made clear that if the order is not complied appeal will stand dismissed for non prosecution and non compliance of order...
To continue reading
Request your trial