Circuit Bench Nagpur

StateCommission

RP/11/22

Akshay Developers & Builders through its Prop.Sandip Raghunath Thaware - Complainant(s)

Versus

Dr.Tikeshwar Gautamrao Ghotekar - Opp.Party(s)

Adv.S.R.Gajbhiye

25 Jul 2011

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT NAGPUR
5 TH FLOOR, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING NO. 1
CIVIL LINES, NAGPUR-440 001
 
Revision Petition No. RP/11/22
(Arisen out of Order Dated 29/06/2011 in Case No. 762/2010 of District None)
 
1. Akshay Developers & Builders through its Prop.Sandip Raghunath Thaware
277-B,Misal Lay-out,Jaripatka,Nagpur
Nagpur
Maharashtra
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Dr.Tikeshwar Gautamrao Ghotekar
C/O M.P.Dhopate,Plot No.8,New Urvella Colony,Ring Road,Nagpur.
Nagpur
Maharashtra
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONABLE MR. S. R. KHANZODE PRESIDING MEMBER
  HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL MEMBER
  HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
Adv.Mr S R Gajbhiye
......for the Petitioner
 
None
......for the Respondent
ORDER

Per Mr S R Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

1.      This Revision Petition takes an exception to the order dtd.29.06.2011 passed on application at Ex.No.18, whereby request made to send certain document for handwriting expert’s examination was rejected by the Fourm.  
 
2.      Heard Adv. Mr S R Gajbhiya for the revision petitioner.
 
3.      In the instant case the Ld. Counsel for the revisionist submitted that though the matter is shown at the stage for argument, the evidence of the revisionist / original opponent yet to close its side of evidence and they want to adduce further evidence as per provision of Sec.13(4) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (the Act’ for brevity).
 
4.      Coming to the merit of the revision, the party, who desires to produce any evidence, has to tender the same on affidavit, including the opinion obtained from the handwriting expert relating to particular document. When the opponent has denied the signatures on the documents alleged to have been signed by him and prayed for sending the said document to the handwriting expert, it is for the Forum only to see in the backdrop of the case as to whether it is necessary to send such document for obtaining expert’s opinion. If the Forum decides to send the document, it can be get examined by handwriting expert available and to our knowledge such experts are available at Nagpur.
 
5.      Since, the matter is already crossed the stage of evidence and now posted for argument, and since, the revisionist failed to satisfy us that the stage is wrongly fixed, we find no reason to hold that the Forum was wrong in rejecting the application.
 
6.      Therefore, we find no merit in this revision application. Certainly, it is not a case of revisional jurisdiction of this Commission. Holding so, we pass the following order:-
 
ORDER
 
1.      Revision is not admitted and stands rejected accordingly.
 
2.      The Forum below shall pay attention to the observations made while disposing of this revision application.
 
3.      No order as to cost.
 
4.      Inform the parties accordingly.
          Pronounced on 25.07.2011.
 
 
[HONABLE MR. S. R. KHANZODE]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[ HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL]
MEMBER
 
[ HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM]
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.