Circuit Bench Nagpur

StateCommission

A/09/15

PRAMOD RAMRAOJI VANARE, - Complainant(s)

Versus

LATE SHRI. TATYASAHEB KORE - Opp.Party(s)

ADV. JAWADE

17 Oct 2011

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT NAGPUR
5 TH FLOOR, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING NO. 1
CIVIL LINES, NAGPUR-440 001
 
First Appeal No. A/09/13
(Arisen out of Order Dated 29/11/2008 in Case No. CC/08/194 of District )
 
1. RUKHAMABAI HARIBHAU PAWAR
AT. SANGALWADI, POST. TARNOLI, TAH. DARWHA, DISTT. YAVATMAL.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. MANAGING DIRECTOR TATYASAHEB KORE,
VARNA UNIT NO. 3, BODEGAON SAHKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA BODEGAON, TAH. DARWHA, DISTT. YAVATMAL.
2. KARYAKARI ADHYAKSHA LATE TATYASAHEB KORE,
VARNA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA UNIT NO. 3, BODEGAON, TAH. DARWAH, DISTT. YAVATMAL.
YAVATMAL
MAHARASHTRA
...........Respondent(s)
First Appeal No. A/09/14
(Arisen out of Order Dated 29/11/2008 in Case No. CC/08/206 of District )
 
1. NANASAHEB NAMDEORAO BHOYAR
R/O. SARANGPUR, POST. MALKHED (BU), TAH. NER, DISTT. YAVATMAL.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. LATE. SHRI. TATYASAHEB KORE
VARNA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA BODEGAON THROUGH EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, VARNA UNIT NO. 3, BODEGAON, TAH. DARWAH, DISTT. YAVATMAL.
...........Respondent(s)
First Appeal No. A/09/15
(Arisen out of Order Dated 29/11/2008 in Case No. CC/08/187 of District )
 
1. PRAMOD RAMRAOJI VANARE,
R/O.AT.POST. CHIKHALI (KANHOBA) TAH. NER, DISTT. YAVATMAL.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. LATE SHRI. TATYASAHEB KORE
VARNA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA BODEGAON, THROUGH EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, VARNA UNIT NO. 3, BODEGAON, TAH. DARWAH, DISTT. YAVATMAL.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole PRESIDING MEMBER
  HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL MEMBER
  HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
None
 ......for the Appellant
 
Adv. Mr. Bhende
 ......for the Respondent
ORDER

PER SHRI S.M.SHEMBOLE, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER.


Appellant in all the appeals as well as their counsel are absent. Adv. Mr. Bhende for the respondents is present. On last date it was directed to issue notice to the appellant and accordingly, notice was issued. Office copy of the notice reflects that it was issued on correct address of the appellant as given in the appeal memo. Therefore, it well have to be presumed that the appellant is duly served with notice but nobody turned up at 2.30 p.m. Hence, appeal deserves to be dismissed in default. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in default. No order as to cost.


 

 
 
 
[ Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole]
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.