Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Sau Vaishali Anil Todre vs Sarika Ritesh Choudhary on 5 February, 2013

  
 
 
 
 
 
 STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
  
 
 
 






 
            	



 



 
   
   
   


   
     
     
     

STATE CONSUMER
    DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,  MAHARASHTRA
    
   
    
     
     

CIRCUIT BENCH
    AT   NAGPUR
    
   
    
     
     

5 TH FLOOR,
    ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING NO. 1
    
   
    
     
     

CIVIL LINES,
    NAGPUR-440 001
    
   
  
  
   

 
  
 
  
   
   

 
  
 
  
   
   
     
     
     
       
       
       

First Appeal
      No. A/11/464
      
     
      
       
       

(Arisen out of
      Order Dated 18/02/2011 in Case No. cc/10/117 of District None)
      
     
    
     

 
    
   
    
     
     

 
    
   
    
     
     
       
       
       
         
         
         

1.

Sau Vaishali Anil Todre R/o Shobhanagar Amaravati Tah.& Distt.Amaravati ...........Appellant(s)     Versus  

1. Sarika Ritesh Choudhary R/o Tank plaza Ambadevi Road Amaravati Near Air Training Center, Tah.& Distt.Amaravati ...........Respondent(s)   BEFORE:

   
Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole PRESIDING MEMBER   HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL MEMBER   HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM MEMBER   PRESENT:
None ......for the Appellant   Adv.Mahure ......for the Respondent ORDER (Passed on 05/02/2013) Appellant Smt.Vaishali as well as her counsel Shri. Jaispurkar are absent. Respondent Sarika as well as her counsel Shri. Belkhande and Adv.Mahure are also absent.  Hence KB Matter is recalled at 3.15 p.m. However, Appellant Smt.Vaishali as well as her counsel Shri. Jaispurkar are absent. Adv.Mahure for the Respondent is present. The record reflects that on last date also Appellant Smt.Vaishali as well as her counsel Shri. Jaispurkar were absent, however, the matter was adjourned till today by way of last chance. But today also Appellant Smt.Vaishali as well as her counsel Shri. Jaispurkar are absent. On perusal of record, it further reflects that there is also delay condonation application pending since June,2011. On perusal of the same application for condonation of delay, it reflects that there was inordinate delay of more than 40 days in preferring the appeal, but no plausible explanation appears to have been given for such delay. Therefore, on this count also, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. Anyhow, as the appellant as well as her counsel are absent, the appeal is dismissed in default.
   
[ Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole] PRESIDING MEMBER   [ HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL] MEMBER   [ HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM] MEMBER