NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/3004/2013

M/S. SANKALP CONSTRUCTION & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

ASHOK SHANKAR KALE & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. M.Y. DESHMUKH

29 Nov 2013

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 3003 OF 2013
 
(Against the Order dated 10/04/2013 in Appeal No. 162/2010 of the State Commission Maharastra)
WITH
IA/5171/2013,IA/5172/2013
1. M/S. SANKALP CONSTRUCTION & ANR.
THROUGH, 1. SHRI PRABHAKAR PADURANG BHOSLE. ADD/ AT SANKALP NAGARI , S.NO-82/2/2, DHANORI, VISHWANTWADI ROAD, DHANORI,
PUNE - 4110015
MAHARASTRA
2. 2 MRS. VANDANA PRABHAKAR BHOSLE,
ADD/ AT SANKALP NAGARI , S.NO-82/22, DHANORI, VISHWANTWADI ROAD, DHANORI,
PUNE - 4110015
MAHARASTRA
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. SHRIKANT VASANT CHOPADE
R/AT : 202, DR.BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR HOUSING SOCIETY, YERAWADA,
PUNE - 6
MAHARASTRA
...........Respondent(s)
REVISION PETITION NO. 3004 OF 2013
 
(Against the Order dated 08/07/2013 in Appeal No. 709/2012 of the State Commission Maharastra)
WITH
IA/5171/2013,IA/5172/2013
1. M/S. SANKALP CONSTRUCTION & ANR.
THROUGH, 1. SHRI PRABHAKAR PADURANG BHOSLE. ADD/ AT SANKALP NAGARI,SURVEY.NO-82/2/2, DHANORI,
PUNE - 411015
MAHARASTRA
2. SOU VAN DAN A PRABHAKAR BHOSALE,
ADD/ AT SANKALP NAGARI , SURVEY.NO-82/2/2, DHANORI,
PUNE - 4110015
MAHARASTRA
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. ASHOK SHANKAR KALE & ANR.
PLOT NO-316 GHARONDA HOUSING SOCIETY, YERAVADA
PUNE - 411014
MAHARASTRA
2. LOKSHAHIR ANNABHAU SATHE, MAGASVARGIYA SAHAJKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT, PUNE,
THROUGH CHAIRMAN, SHRI SHIVAJI KISAN MORE, R/O ANANDNAGAR, CHINCHWAD
PUNE
MAHARASTRA
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER

For the Petitioner :
Mr. Yatin M. Jagtap, Proxy counsel
For the Respondent :
For the Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Dhyanaraj Sant, Advocate
For the Respondent No. 2 : NEMO

Dated : 29 Nov 2013
ORDER

Counsel for the petitioners is again absent.  On the last date of hearing too, the counsel for the petitioners sought adjournment by moving an application.  Proxy counsel has yet moved another application stating that father of the counsel has expired and he has gone to his native place Ahmadnagar.  On the other hand, counsel for the respondent/complainant Mr. Dhyanaraj Sant from Maharashtra is present and he submits that matters have been settled and since he has made the statement before the Bar, therefore, I do not challenge the same. 

The cases are, therefore, dismissed as compromised. However, if there is a fact to the contrary, the petitioners can move application for restoration.

 The matters stands dismissed as compromised.

 

 
......................J
J.M. MALIK
PRESIDING MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.