Maharashtra

StateCommission

MA/10/446

MR SURINDER KAUR - Complainant(s)

Versus

MR BHAGWAN BHAI PATEL & Ors. - Opp.Party(s)

U B WAVIKAR

07 Oct 2010

ORDER


BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
Miscellaneous Application No. MA/10/446
1. MR SURINDER KAURR/AT C-2 /304 INLAK SOCIETY YARI ROAD ANDHERI (W)MUMBAI MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA ...........Appellant(s)

Versus
1. MR BHAGWAN BHAI PATEL & Ors.GEETA NEEL ARCADE 44 HILL ROAD BANDRA (W) MUMBAI MUMBAIMAHARASHTRA ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE :
Hon'ble Mr. S.R. Khanzode PRESIDING MEMBERHon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar Member
PRESENT :Ms.Rashmi Manne,Advocate, Proxy for U B WAVIKAR , Advocate for for the Appellant 1 Mr.Sachin Korgaonkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Ms.Kanchan Kambli, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2,3 & 4.

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.

ORDER

 Heard both sides.  There is delay of 18 days in filing this appeal and the reason mentioned is that, after receipt of order, the Appellant was not aware how to take further course of action and after taking legal advice found out that the appeal can be filed on the said order. 

 

     Applicant/Appellant is a lady and she has rightly referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of LandCollector Acquisition Anantnag & Anr. V/s.Mst Katiji & Ors., in Civil Appeal No.460 of 1987 (1987 CLR. 97 SC), that:

 

“Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late.  Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated.  As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a Cause  would be decided on merits after hearing the parties.”

 

     In the given circumstances, we find the delay of 18 days is satisfactorily explained and holding accordingly pass the following order:

 

O  R  D  E  R

 

           (i)          Misc.Application No.446/2010 for condonation of delay, is allowed.

 

         (ii)          Delay is condoned subject to payment of cost of Rs.1,000/- to be paid to each one of the Opposite Parties/Respondents. 

 

        (iii)          Cost be paid within 15 days from today, failing which the application shall stand automatically rejected, without reference to the Commission.

 

       (iv)          Subject to fulfillment of the condition of payment of cost within time, the appeal is now fixed for hearing admission to 29/11/2010.

PRONOUNCED :
Dated : 07 October 2010

[Hon'ble Mr. S.R. Khanzode]PRESIDING MEMBER[Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar]Member