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 2, Cited by 0]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

M/S.Gariba Construction Co. vs Malad Dipti Apartment Chs Ltd. on 27 April, 2010

  
 
 
 
 CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION



 

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL 
COMMISSION
 

MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI
 


 
 

REVISION PETITION NO. 38 OF 
2010                         Date of filing : 22/03/2010
 

IN EXE. APPL. NO. 14 OF 
2008                                    Date of order : 
27/04/2010
 

IN CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 
243 OF 2006                    
 

DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : 
SOUTH MUMBAI
 

 
 

M/s.Gariba Construction Co.
 

Thru Shri Bimal Gariba
 

807, Himalaya 
Society, Juhu Lane,
 


Andheri (W), Mumbai-400 
058.            Petitioner/org. O.P.
 


          V/s.
 

Malad Dipti Apartment CHS 
Ltd.
 

Khot Village, Mamlatdar 
Wadi,
 

Road No.5, Malad (W),
 

Mumbai  400 
064.                                       Respondent/org. complainant
 

 
 

 
 


Quorum : Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member

                         Mrs.S.P. Lale, Honble Member        Appearance : Mr.A.V. Patwardhan, Advocate for the petitioner.

                         

Mr.Kiran Patil, Advocate for the respondent.

 

-: ORAL ORDER :-

 
Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member             This Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 14/12/2009 whereby in an Execution Application No.14/2008 which was initiated on the basis of composite application for execution under Section 25 & 27 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986; it was directed to issue bailable warrant for Rs.20,000/- against the revisionist-Shri Bimal Gariba. 
          We heard Mr.A.V. Patwardhan, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr.Kiran Patil, Advocate for the respondent.
          Since bailable warrant is issued to secure presence in the execution proceeding, no legal fault we find in it.  In fact, if there is composite application, this Commission has already issued several directions the way it has to be proceeded with.  Forum below must be aware of those things and expected to follow those directions. 
          Revisionist can always appear before the Forum below and participate.  With these observations, finding this as a case which needs no interference.  We hold accordingly and pass the following order :-
                    -: ORDER :-
1.       Revision Petition stands dismissed.
2.       No order as to costs.
3.       Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.
   

(S.P. Lale)                                                             (S.R. Khanzode)   Member                                                     Presiding Judicial Member