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 1, Cited by 1]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Taneja Developers & Infrastructure ... vs Ashu Kapur on 21 February, 2011

  
 
 
 
 
 
 IN THE STATE COMMISSION:DELHI
  
 
 
 







 



 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 IN THE
STATE COMMISSION:   DELHI  

 

(Constituted
under Section 9 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986) 

 

  

 

Date of Decision: 21.02.2011 

 

   

 

 Appeal No. FA-10/379 

 

(Arising out of Order dated
11.3.10 passed by the District Consumer Forum(  New
  Delhi) Barracks, Kasturba Gandhi Marg,
  New Delhi in
CC No.990/09). 

 

  

 

  

 

M/s. Taneja Developers &  Appellant 

 

Infrastructure
Ltd., 

 

9, Kasturba
Gandhi Marg, 

 

New Delhi-110001. 

 

  

 

  

 

Versus 

 

  

 

  

 

Shri Ashu
Kapur  Respondent  

 

Partner M/s. P.M.
Dwarka Das, 

 

2117/18,   Bank Street, 

 

Karol Bagh, 

 

  New
  Delhi. 

 

  

 

  

 

 CORAM 

 

   

 

Justice Barkat Ali Zaidi  President 

 

Ms. Salma Noor  Member 
     

1. Whether Reporters of local newspapers be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporter of not?

         

Justice Barkat Ali Zaidi(Oral)

1. The appellant has come in appeal before this Commission against the judgment of District Consumer Forum, alongwith which he has filed an application for condonation of delay.

2. We have heard Shri Rahul Mehra, counsel for the appellant and Shri Sanjeev Nirwani, counsel for the respondent.

3. There is 21 days delay in filing of the appeal. The appellant says that he came to know about the judgment when summons of execution were served on 1.5.10 on him, and he thereafter obtained the certified copy of the order, and filed the appeal. Copy of the entries of the dispatch register of the District Consumer Forum unravels that the certified copy of the judgment was sent by registered post on 11.3.10. The presumption is that it must have been received by the applicant normally within 7 days. The mere averment of the applicant in the application cannot be considered sufficient to revert presumption. Besides, in this case, the respondent himself sent the copy of the judgment by the speed post to the applicant(appellant). He has filed the copy of the receipt of the speed post alongwith his reply and the affidavit which shows that it was delivered to the appellant on 16.3.10. This is another proof of the factum of delivery of judgment to the appellant.

4. The appeal was filed 21 days after the limitation for filing the appeal expired. No reason has been given for this delay of 21 days.

5. Application rejected.

6. Bank Guarantee/FDR, if any, furnished by the appellant be returned forthwith.

7. A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to Record room.

8. Announced on 21st day of February, 2011.

   

(Justice Barkat Ali Zaidi) President   (Salma Noor) Member             ysc