STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
U.T.,CHANDIGARH
First Appeal No. | : | 265 of 2013 |
Date of Institution | : | 21.06.2013 |
Date of Decision | : | 29.08.2013 |
1] Chandigarh.
2]
……Appellants/Opposite Parties No.1 and 2.
Versus
1]
2]
3]
(Service of Respondent No.3 dispensed with vide order dated 5.8.2013)
Respondent/Opposite Party No.3.
Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
BEFORE:
Argued by:
Service of respondent No.3 dispensed with vide order dated 5.8.2013.
PER DEV RAJ, MEMBER
13]
However, the complaint against Opposite Party No.3, the Agent of Opposite Parties No.1 and 2, was dismissed by the District Forum.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10. , wherein it was held that the District Fora and the State Commissions have not been conferred with any powers to set aside exparte orders and review and the powers which
11.
12.
13. been conferred with the powers to set aside the exparte 14.
15. ,, decided on 8.10.2010, the Hon’ble Apex Court
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Pronounced.
29th
PRESIDENT
[DEV RAJ]
MEMBER
Ad
STATE COMMISSION
(First Appeal No.265 of 2013)
Argued by:
Service of respondent No.3 dispensed with vide order dated 5.8.2013.
Dated the 29th
ORDER
(DEV RAJ) MEMBER | (JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER (RETD.)) PRESIDENT | |
Ad
