Circuit Bench Nagpur

StateCommission

RP/08/9

M/S. ASHOK ENTERPRISES, - Complainant(s)

Versus

SMT. SHANTABAI BALBHIM JADHAV - Opp.Party(s)

ADV. R.R.DESHPANDE

04 May 2011

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT NAGPUR
5 TH FLOOR, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING NO. 1
CIVIL LINES, NAGPUR-440 001
 
Revision Petition No. RP/08/9
(Arisen out of Order Dated 30/11/2007 in Case No. CC/07/258 of District )
 
1. M/S. ASHOK ENTERPRISES,
THROUGH ASHOK LAXMANRAO GULHANE, R/O. WALGAON ROAD, YEOTMAL, TAHSIL AND DISTRICT. YEOTMAL.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. SMT. SHANTABAI BALBHIM JADHAV
PLOT NO. 14, VYANKATESHNAGAR, ARUNODAY SOCIETY, YEOTMAL, TAHSIL AND DIST. YEOTMAL.
2. SWATI BALBHIM JADHAV
C/O. MADHUKAR JADHAV, PLOT NO. 14,VYANKATESHNAGAR,ARUNODAY SOCIETY, YEOTMAL,
YEOTMAL
MAHARASHTRA
3. SHAILESH BALBHIM JADHAV
C/O. MADHUKAR JADHAV, PLOT NO. 13, VYANKATESHNAGAR, ARUNODAY SOCIETY, YEOTMAL
YEOTMAL
MAHARASHTRA
4. NILESH BALBHIM JADHAV
C/O. MADHUKAR JADHAV, PLOT NO. 14, VYANKATESHNAGAR, ARUNODAY SOCIETY, YEOTMAL.
YEOTMAL
MAHARASHTRA
5. DISTRICT FORUM, YEOTMAL
YEOTMAL
YEOTMAL
MAHARASHTRA
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  HON'BLE P.N.KASHALKAR PRESIDING MEMBER
  HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

PER SHRI P.N. KASHALKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal is filed by the original Opponent against the order dated 30/11/2007 passed by District Forum, Yavatmal in CC.No.158/07.  The said complaint was filed seeking certain reliefs against the Appellant/Original Opponent. We need not go into that aspect of the matter, but when the complaint was filed, it was filed belatedly and objection was taken by the appellant herein, but inspite of that, the condonation of delay application was not decided on 30/11/2007 when the case was on the file of District Forum, Yavatmal. Complainant was present through his advocate and the Opponent was present in person. Several chances were given to both the parties to argue on the condonation of delay application, but in the order sheet dated 30/11/2007 it has been noted that the parties have not argued the matter and therefore, the forum decided that condonation of delay application will be heard at the time of final argument. This ordersheet has been challenged in this appeal.

                 Both the parties are absent though they were duly served. But we perused the impugned order. We are finding that the order passed by the district forum to decide the condonation of delay point at the time of of final hearing is per se bad in law and can not be allowed to sustain in law. When any complaint is filed at the stage of admission itself, the district forum has to decide whether it is filed within time limit and whether it is having jurisdiction and then only it should admit the complaint and proceed further. If any complaint is filed on the face of it beyond the period of limitation and if the application for condonation of delay is filed then that should be decided first and complaint can be admitted and proceed further then only.  In the instant case this procedure was bypassed by the learned district forum and it has simply decided that the condonation of delay application will be heard alongwith final argument. This is not permissible in law. Hence we are inclined to quash the ordersheet dated 30/11/2007. Hence the order..

                                                                           ORDER

            Appeal is allowed and ordersheet dated 30/11/2007 in CC.No.158/07 of District Forum, Yavatmal is quashed and set-aside.

            The complaint is remitted back to the District Forum. The Forum is directed to take hearing on condonation of delay application first and then decide whether delay is to be condoned and if at all delay is condoned and if at all it is having jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, then only complaint shall be admitted and proceeded further.

             Since both the parties are absent, after remand of this complaint, the Forum shall issue notices to both the parties and on the very first day of appearance of both the parties, delay condonation should be decided initially before proceeding further.

             Inform the parties accordingly.

 

 
 
[ HON'BLE P.N.KASHALKAR]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[ HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL]
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.