State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
M/S Diamond Enterprises vs Mrs Yogita Vishnu Bhawar on 19 March, 2015
Daily Order BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI First Appeal No. A/14/858 (Arisen out of Order Dated 14/03/2014 in Case No. 280/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr Bhaskar Pundlik Sonawane 714, somwar Peth Chandwad Tal Chadwad Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/859 (Arisen out of Order Dated 15/03/2014 in Case No. 272/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9
Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mrs Yogita Vishnu Bhawar Post Dari Tal Chandwad Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/860 (Arisen out of Order Dated 14/03/2014 in Case No. 303/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Dinkar Bhaskar Deshmukh Parijat Colony, Hanuman Nagar, Nandgaon Tal Nandgaon Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/861 (Arisen out of Order Dated 15/03/2014 in Case No. 268/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Bhanudas Somnath Mahale Siddhivinayak Apat Shakti Nagar Hirawadi Panchvati Nashik 422003 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/862 (Arisen out of Order Dated 14/03/2014 in Case No. 240/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Nitin Madhukar More Flat No 3Karpur Housing Society Sneha Nagar, Marshul Nashik422004 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/863 (Arisen out of Order Dated 14/03/2014 in Case No. 305/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. MRS Rashmi Bhushanrao Bhosale B-6, Chandrawell apartment, Behind Hotel Prakash, govind Nagar, Mumbai Naka Nashik Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/864 (Arisen out of Order Dated 15/03/2014 in Case No. 265/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Late Mr. Jayant Mahadeo Mirjkar ATharva Bunglow, Mehta High School Road, Near Vijay Nagar, Nashik Road Nashik Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/865 (Arisen out of Order Dated 15/03/2014 in Case No. 246/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mrs Shaila Nivruti Katad at Post Matori Tal Nashik Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/866 (Arisen out of Order Dated 15/03/2014 in Case No. 263/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Late Mr. Jayant Mahadeo Mirjkar Atharva Bunglow, Mehta High School Road Near Vijay Nagar Nashik Road, Nashik Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/867 (Arisen out of Order Dated 14/03/2014 in Case No. 281/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Pandharinath Yashwant Khapre Shiv Vichar Row Housing Society, Amrutdham, Ambaji Nagar Panchvati Nashik Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/868 (Arisen out of Order Dated 14/03/2014 in Case No. 284/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Ashok Sukdeo Pekhale Flat No 7, Shivsmurti Apartment, Near RTO Office, Durga Nagar Peth Road, Nashik 422004 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/869 (Arisen out of Order Dated 15/03/2014 in Case No. 270/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Rajendra Gangadhar Gaikwad Post Bahaduri Tal Chandwad Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/870 (Arisen out of Order Dated 14/03/2014 in Case No. 282/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mrs Dipali Navneet Sonawane 714, Somwar Peth, Chandwad Tal Chandwad Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/871 (Arisen out of Order Dated 15/03/2014 in Case No. 271/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Amol Suryabhan Kale Redgaon Tal Chandwad Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/872 (Arisen out of Order Dated 15/03/2014 in Case No. 269/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Ashok Eknath Walunj At Post Bahaduri Tal Chandwad Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/873 (Arisen out of Order Dated 14/03/2014 in Case No. 249/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Shankar Raghunath Kopre Wadner Bharav Tal Chandwad Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/874 (Arisen out of Order Dated 15/03/2014 in Case No. 264/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Smt Mangala Jayant Mirjkar Atharva Bunglow, Mehta High School Road Near Vijay Nagar, Nashik Road Nashik Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/875 (Arisen out of Order Dated 15/03/2014 in Case No. 266/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Mandar Jayant Mirjkar Ved Building Shivaji Road, Nashik Road Nashik 422101 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/876 (Arisen out of Order Dated 14/03/2014 in Case No. 247/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Mahesh Kailash Valve Gangapadli Post Lakhalgaon Aurangabad Road Tal Nashik Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/877 (Arisen out of Order Dated 14/03/2014 in Case No. 201/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr. Dinkar Kashinath Mandlik Mandlik Nagar, Anandvalli, Gangapur Road Nashik 422013 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/878 (Arisen out of Order Dated 15/03/2014 in Case No. 245/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Mr Nivruti Vitthal Katad AT Post MAtori Tal Nashik Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) First Appeal No. A/14/879 (Arisen out of Order Dated 14/03/2014 in Case No. 196/2013 of District Nashik) 1. M/s Diamond Enterprises Through its Proprietor Mr. Santosh Aher NamPrabha govind Prabhu Row Houses Ambad Link Road, Cidco, Nashik-9 Nashik Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Anita Subhash Mawal Wadner Bhariav Tal Chandwad Nashik Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: JUSTICE R. C. Chavan PRESIDENT P.B. Joshi JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant: Adv. Nandkishore H. Lahoti For the Respondent: In Appeal No.865 of 2014 and Appeal No.878 of 2014, Adv. K. G. Rikame instructed by Adv. Sagar G. Talekar for the Respondent No.1/original Complainant In all other appeals, Adv. Keshav S. Shelke for the Respondents Nos.1 and 2/original Complainants In all these appeals, Adv. Hassan Khan instructed by Adv. Ganesh Palve for the Respondent No.3 - M/s. Wekalp Trade Solutions ORDER Common Order in First Appeal No.858 of 2014 to First Appeal No.879 of 2014 (Total 22 cases) Per - Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. C. Chavan, President In all these cases, learned Adv. Nandkishore H. Lahoti is present on behalf of the Appellants/original Opponents Nos.3 to 7. Except for First Appeal No.865 of 2014 and First Appeal No.878 of 2014, in all other appeals, learned Adv. Keshav S. Shelke is present on behalf of the Respondents Nos.1 and 2/original Complainants. In First Appeal No.865 of 2014 and First Appeal No.878 of 2014, learned Adv. K. G. Rikame instructed by Adv. Sagar G. Talekar is present on behalf of the Respondent No.1/original Complainant. In all these cases, Adv. Hassan Khan instructed by Adv. Ganesh Palve is present on behalf of Respondent No.3 - M/s. Wekalp Trade Solutions.
[2] These appeals have been listed for hearing on admission. However, we have taken up all these appeals for final hearing with the consent of the parties at the stage of admission itself. We have heard the learned counsel present before us at length. With their help, we have also carefully perused the material placed on record.
[3] We find that order under challenge in all these appeals, passed by the District Forum, cannot be sustained because original Opponents Nos.1 and 2 have been shown as two proprietors of M/s. Wekalp Trade Solutions, whereas original Opponents Nos.2 to 5 have been shown as three proprietors of M/s. Diamond Enterprises (Appellants herein).
[4] Learned counsel for the original Complainants has made available for our perusal certain documents to show that in fact, there was partnership deed amongst original Opponents Nos.3 to 5. He states that in other complaints, which are still pending for adjudication before the District Forum, he has preferred an application seeking permission of the District Forum to amend the complaints to show the Opponents Nos.3 to 5 as the partners of M/s. Diamond Enterprises. We feel that same course ought to be followed in the present cases also, since the District Forum could not have passed an order showing two or three persons as the proprietors of one entity. If, the entity is a partnership firm then, in that case, all partners of the firm should be properly arrayed as Co-Opponents upon disclosing their correct names and current postal addresses.
Hence, we pass the following order:-
ORDER First Appeals bearing No.858 of 2014 to 879 of 2014 are hereby allowed. Impugned orders passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nasik are hereby set aside. Consequently, the consumer complaints are remanded to the District Forum for fresh adjudication after allowing the original Complainants to apply for necessary amendment.
Parties shall bear their own costs.
Pronounced on 19th March, 2015 [ JUSTICE R. C. Chavan] PRESIDENT [ P.B. Joshi] JUDICIAL MEMBER