State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
M/S.Annappi Construction Co. Through ... vs 1. Rahul Gyandas Gupta And Ors. on 24 June, 2015
BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
BEFORE THE
HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
MISC.APPLICATION
NO.MA/14/111 a/w. RP/14/65
(Arisen out of Order Dated 19/12/2013 in Consumer Complaint
No.CC/12/118 of
Addl.Mumbai
Suburban District Forum)
M/s.Annappi Construction Co.
Through its Proprietor
Mr.Laxman Dhanji Sanghani
R/at : Nellkanth Shopping Centre, 2nd
floor, Navroji Lane,
Kama Galli, Ghatkopar (East), Mumbai 400 086.
.Applicant/revision petitioner(s)
Versus
1.Rahul Gyandas Gupta, R/a.CCJ, Ambika Apartment, Room No.213, 2nd floor, Sarvodaya Nagar, Nahur Road, Mulund West, Mumbai 400 080.
2. Mr.Bappanand Nariman Anu, R/a. 404, B Wing, Bhavani Towars, IIT Powai, Mumbai 400 077.
3. Mr.Manoj Kumar Shyan Devadiga R/at : 403, B Wing, Bhavani Towers, IIT Powai, Mumbai 400 077.
4. Mulund Keshvpada Sammishra Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
Through its Secretary Keshapada, P.K.Road, Mulund West, Mumbai 400 0078.
..Non-applicant/Respondent(s) MISC.APPLICATION NO.MA/14/112 a/w. RP/14/66 (Arisen out of Order Dated 19/12/2013 in Consumer Complaint No.CC/12/119 of Addl.Mumbai Suburban District Forum) M/s.Annappi Construction Co.
Through its Proprietor Mr.Laxman Dhanji Sanghani R/at : Nellkanth Shopping Centre, 2nd floor, Navroji Lane, Kama Galli, Ghatkopar (East), Mumbai 400 086.
. Applicant/revision petitioner(s) Versus
1. Hiramanidevi Gyandas Gupta, R/a.CCJ, Ambika Apartment, Room No.213, 2nd floor, Sarvodaya Nagar, Nahur Road, Mulund West, Mumbai 400 080.
2. Mr.Bappanand Nariman Anu, R/a. 404, B Wing, Bhavani Towars, IIT Powai, Mumbai 400 077.
3. Mr.Manoj Kumar Shyan Devadiga R/at : 403, B Wing, Bhavani Towers, IIT Powai, Mumbai 400 077.
4. Mulund Keshvpada Sammishra Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
Through its Secretary Keshapada, P.K.Road, Mulund West, Mumbai 400 0078.
.. Non-applicant/Respondent(s) MISC.APPLICATION NO.MA/14/113 a/w. RP/14/66 (Arisen out of Order Dated 19/12/2013 in Consumer Complaint No.CC/12/119 of Addl.Mumbai Suburban District Forum) M/s.Annappi Construction Co.
Through its Proprietor Mr.Laxman Dhanji Sanghani R/at : Nellkanth Shopping Centre, 2nd floor, Navroji Lane, Kama Galli, Ghatkopar (East), Mumbai 400 086.
. Applicant/revision petitioner(s) Versus
1. Hiramanidevi Gyandas Gupta, R/a.CCJ, Ambika Apartment, Room No.213, 2nd floor, Sarvodaya Nagar, Nahur Road, Mulund West, Mumbai 400 080.
2. Rahul Gyandas Gupta, R/a.CCJ, Ambika Apartment, Room No.213, 2nd floor, Sarvodaya Nagar, Nahur Road, Mulund West, Mumbai 400 080.
3. Mr.Bappanand Nariman Anu, R/a. 404, B Wing, Bhavani Towars, IIT Powai, Mumbai 400 077.
4. Mr.Manoj Kumar Shyan Devadiga R/at : 403, B Wing, Bhavani Towers, IIT Powai, Mumbai 400 077.
5. Mulund Keshvpada Sammishra Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
Through its Secretary Keshapada, P.K.Road, Mulund West, Mumbai 400 0078.
.. Non-applicant/Respondent(s) BEFORE:
MR. Shashikant A. Kulkarni, Judicial Member PRESENT:
Adv.A.N.Pareira present for the applicants/revision petitioners.
Adv.Bhaskar Yogi for the respondent no.1.
Adv.V.S.Paradkar for the respondent no.2 & 3.
Adv.Amit Kasabe for the respondent no.4.
ORDER Per Mr.Shashikant A. Kulkarni, Judicial Member These are 3 misc.applications for condonation of delay in filing revision petitions Heard Adv.A.N.Pareira for the applicant/revision petitioner and Adv.Bhaskar Yogi for the respondent no.1, Adv.V.S.Paradkar for the respondent no.2 & 3 and Adv.Amit Kasabe for the respondent no.4.
Submissions are made and a copy of common judgment dated 21/05/2015 of the District Forum disposing the original proceedings is filed on record. It is not contraverted.
Delay over 90 days of 35 days of prescribed limitation is caused to file revision petitions against the interim relief order passed by the District Forum dated 19/12/2013.
Learned Adv.Pareira submitted that it is necessary to decide these misc.application for academic purpose. However, I am of the view that this exercise is unnecessary because learned District Forum undisputedly has already disposed off the original proceedings. The revision petitioners will get an opportunity to file appeals with a ground raised in the revision petitions and to contend that original proceedings decided ex-parte denying opportunity to petitioners to contest. Hence, these misc.applciations stand disposed off with no order to as costs. Consequently, revision petitions do not deserve any consideration.
Pronounced Dated 24th June, 2015.
[Shashikant A. Kulkarni] JUDICIAL MEMBER pgg