NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/4054/2009

DR. MUVVA LAXMI RAJESWARI - Complainant(s)

Versus

NUNNE PRADEEP - Opp.Party(s)

MR. Y. RAJAGOPALA RAO

24 Nov 2009

ORDER

Date of Filing: 03 Nov 2009

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. No. RP/4054/2009
(Against the Order dated 26/06/2009 in Appeal No. 16/2006 of the State Commission Andhra Pradesh)
1. DR. MUVVA LAXMI RAJESWARI ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. NUNNE PRADEEP ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN ,PRESIDENTHON'BLE MR. B.K. TAIMNI ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :MR. Y. RAJAGOPALA RAO
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 24 Nov 2009
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.

          Delay of 18 days in filing the revision petition is condoned.

          Finding recorded by the State Commission is a finding of fact based on evidence which cannot be interfered with in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. 

Under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in Revisional jurisdiction this Commission can interfere only if the State Commission exercises jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.

 

-2-

We agree with the findings recorded by the State Commission and do not find that there has been any material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction on either of accounts mentioned in Section 21 of the Act.  Dismissed.



......................JASHOK BHANPRESIDENT
......................B.K. TAIMNIMEMBER