West Bengal

StateCommission

FA/408/2010

M/S Tarama Construction. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri Samit Pahari. - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. P.K. Giri.

02 Dec 2010

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
WEST BENGAL
BHABANI BHAWAN (Gr. Floor),
31, Belvedere Road, Kolkata - 700027
 
FA No: 408 Of 2010
(Arisen out of Order Dated 08/12/2009 in Case No. 173/2008 of District South 24 Parganas DF, Alipore)
 
1. M/S Tarama Construction.
A propprietorship Firm, 29, Lake East, 4th Floor, Kolkata - 700 075, P.S. Purba Jadavpur
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Sri Samit Pahari.
S/o Late Byomkesh Pahari, 16A, Natun Path, Sakuntal Bhaban, 1st Floor, Modern Park, Santoshpur, Kolkata - 75, P.S. Purba Jadavpur, Dist. South 24 Pgs.
2. Sri Subhas Roy
S/o Late Protap Roy, 16A, Natun Path, Modern Park, 2nd Floor, Santoshpur, Kolkata - 75, P.S. Purba Jadavpur.
3. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India
Jadavpur University Branch, Kolkata - 700 032
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. SILPI MAJUMDER Member
 
For the Appellant:Mr. P.K. Giri., Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. D. K. Misra., Advocate
 Mr. Rajib Niyogi., Advocate
ORDER

No. 4/02.12.2010.

 

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA, PRESIDENT.

 

Appellant through Mr. P. K. Giri, the Ld. Advocate and Respondent No. 1 through Mr. D. K. Mishra, the Ld. Advocate are present.

 

This is an application for condonation of delay.  The appeal has been filed out of time by about 165 days.  It has been stated in the above application that after the impugned judgement and order was passed on 08.12.2009 the Appellant became ill on two occasions, one for the period from 10.12.2009 till 20.02.2010 and for the second time for the period from 11.03.2010 to 15.04.2010.  After the recovery from first illness, the Petitioner changed his Ld. Advocate.  Again after recovery from the second illness the Petitioner further changed his Ld. Advocate for filing of this appeal.  In respect of aforesaid both the illness no document has been produced in support thereof.  No reason has also been disclosed as to why the Ld. Advocate were changed from time to time even though the Petitioner himself alleged to be lying ill.  We, therefore, fail to derive any confidence from the averments so made in the above application for the purpose of condonation of delay.  The same is accordingly dismissed.  The appeal shall stand dismissed as being barred by limitation.

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. SILPI MAJUMDER]
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.