NCDRC

NCDRC

FA/345/1999

HARESH V. NICHANI - Complainant(s)

Versus

JAI HIND CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. KUKREJA & CO.

19 Jan 2010

ORDER

Date of Filing: 06 Sep 1999

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIAPPEAL NO. No. FA/341/1999
(Against the Order dated 06/08/1999 in Complaint No. 294/97 of the State Commission Maharastra)
1. MRS. MADHURI H. NICHANI RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 182 BUILDING NO. 8 OM LAMBA CO - OP. HSG. SOC. LTD. SION CHUNABHATTI . MUMBAI 400 022 ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. JAI HIND CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. OFFICE AT 108 NAGINDAS MASTER ROAD FORT MUMBAI - 400 001 ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN ,PRESIDENTHON'BLE MR. B.K. TAIMNI ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :Mr. P.V. Nichani, In person for M/S. KUKREJA & CO. , Advocate
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 19 Jan 2010
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.

          These appeals are pending since 1999.  The appeals filed by the appellants were not maintainable in view of Section 107 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, which requires prior permission from the State to file the appeals.  Appellants did not obtain the permission from the State Government.  Case was ordered to be adjourned sine die on 28.7.2008.  The case could not be kept pending for indefinite period and, therefore, the case was ordered to be listed on 26.11.2009 on which date the following order was passed :

These appeals are pending since 1999.  The appeals filed by the appellants are not maintainable in view of the provisions of Section 107 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, which requires prior permission from the State to file the appeal.  Permission has not yet been filed.  Appellant, who is appearing in person and is a lawyer by profession, states that because of the change in the Ministry, he could not get the necessary permission.  Seeks an adjournment of 6 months, which is declined.  However, in the interests of justice, by way of last opportunity, we adjourn this case to 19th January 2010.  In case permission is not filed by that date, the appeal shall be disposed of in accordance with law. 

                    Copy of this order be given Dasti to the appellant.”

 

          Appellant, who is appearing in person, states that he has not been able to obtain the necessary permission so far but is likely to get the permission from the Minister of Cooperation within this month.  We cannot wait for indefinite period to enable the appellant to get the permission from State Government.  Appeals are pending for the last ten years.  In spite of lapse of ten years, requisite permission has not been obtained.

          Appeals are dismissed as not maintainable as the appellant has not obtained the permission from the State Government to file the appeals.

          In case, the appellant gets the permission within this month, he would be at liberty to move an application for revival of the appeals.

 



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