NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/4362/2009

HUDA - Complainant(s)

Versus

HIMANSHU MEHTA - Opp.Party(s)

MR. R.S. BADHRAN

08 Dec 2009

ORDER

Date of Filing: 25 Nov 2009

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. No. RP/4362/2009
(Against the Order dated 24/08/2009 in Appeal No. 1072/2009 of the State Commission Haryana)
1. HUDAThrough its Estate Officer,Sector 13,Hisar ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. HIMANSHU MEHTAHouse No.87,Sector-16 & 17,Hisar ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN ,PRESIDENTHON'BLE MR. B.K. TAIMNI ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :MR. R.S. BADHRAN
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 08 Dec 2009
ORDER

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.

 

          State Commission has dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. There was a delay of 1304 days in filing the appeal, which is over and above the statutory period of 30 days provided for filing the appeal. Even the limitation for filing the complaint is 2 years. The appeal certainly cannot be entertained after a delay of more than 3 years.
          We agree with the view taken by the State Commission. Dismissed.


......................JASHOK BHANPRESIDENT
......................B.K. TAIMNIMEMBER