Maharashtra

StateCommission

A/07/1616

GURUKRUPA TRAVELLS - Complainant(s)

Versus

MR TUSHAR DATTATRAY PATIL & ORS - Opp.Party(s)

SHYAM KONDHALKAR

18 Oct 2010

ORDER

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
 
First Appeal No. A/07/1616
(Arisen out of Order Dated 26/06/2007 in Case No. 226/2006 of District Satara)
 
1. GURUKRUPA TRAVELLS
PROP SHRI SUDHIR S. GAIKWAD, 1 ST FLOOR, SANKALP VISAVA PARK, SATARA.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. MR TUSHAR DATTATRAY PATIL & ORS
MADHUBAN HSG SOCIETY (SBI), MHASOBA NALA, HADPSAR, PUNE 28
PUNE
MAHARASHTRA
2. Mr. Hanumant Namdev Jagdale
Res. at Ganesh Krupa, Flat No. 2, South Shivaji Nagar, in front Ravi Khan Hair, Sangali
Sangali
Maharashtra
3. Mr. Chandrasen Pandurang Barge
Res. at Koregaon, Tal. Koregaon, Dist. Satara
Satara
Maharashtra
4. Mr. Pandurang G. Anugade
Res. at Anand HSG Society, Shahu Nagar, Godoli, Dist. Satara
Satara
Maharashtra
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 Hon'ble Mr. S.R. Khanzode PRESIDING MEMBER
 Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar Member
 
PRESENT:SHYAM KONDHALKAR , Advocate for the Appellant 1
 
ORDER

Per Shri S.R. Khanzode – Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member:

 

     There is delay of 131 days in filing this appeal.  To condone the delay Misc.Application No.2233/2007 is filed.  The delay is enormous which is explained as under:

 

“The Applicant has received an order on 10th July, 2007 by post.  The Applicant could not be able to file an Appeal in time due to health reason and there has been delay of 131 days in filing an appeal.”

 

    

 

O  R  D  E  R

 

     (i)      Misc Application No.2233/2007 stands dismissed. 

 

    (ii)       Delay is not condoned. 

 

  (iii)       Appeal accordingly is not entertained.

 

     In support of contentions related to health reason, one certificate of Dr.Suresh Shinde is placed on record.  Said certificate is issued in the name of “Mr.Sudhir Govind Gaikwad”.  The party before us is different (whose father’s name or middle name starts with alphabet ‘S’).  We asked Ld. Counsel to explain this discrepancy.  He failed to explain the same.  Under the circumstances, we find that the delay of 131 days is not at all satisfactorily explained and holding accordingly, we pass the following order:

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