NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/370/2010

KIRIT PRADYUMANBHAI SHAH - Complainant(s)

Versus

LABH CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

IN PERSON

23 Mar 2010

ORDER

Date of Filing: 12 Jan 2010

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. No. RP/370/2010
(Against the Order dated 05/07/2006 in Appeal No. 67/2002 of the State Commission Gujarat)
1. KIRIT PRADYUMANBHAI SHAH14, New Alkapuri Society, Gulabi TekraAhmedabad ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. LABH CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. & ANR.104, Shananu, Sardar Patel Nagar, EllisbridgeAhmedabad - 062. SAMEER (MEMNAGAR) OWNERS-ASSOCIATIONGurukul, MemnagarAhmedabad ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.C. JAIN ,PRESIDING MEMBERHON'BLE MR. ANUPAM DASGUPTA ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :NEMO
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 23 Mar 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.

None appears for the petitioner. The order sought to be challenged in these proceedings is dated 05.07.06. It would appear that application for obtaining certified copy of the impugned order was moved before the concerned Commission on 14.12.2009 and certified copy was delivered on 31.12.2009. There is absolutely no mention anywhere in the petition as to whether the petitioner received the copy of the impugned order from the State Commission which the State Commission is required to supply free of cost under the relevant rules. The Registry has not cared to find out this and has gone by the date of delivery of the certified copy and reported that there is no delay in filing the revision petition. Apparently, the revision petition filed against the order dated 5.07.2006 is patently barred by limitation and is dismissed as such.



......................JR.C. JAINPRESIDING MEMBER
......................ANUPAM DASGUPTAMEMBER