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]

National Consumer Disputes Redressal

M/S. Shewalkar Developers Limited & ... vs Madanmohan . on 13 April, 2016

          NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION  NEW DELHI          FIRST APPEAL NO. 229 OF 2016     (Against the Order dated 20/02/2016 in Complaint No. 13/2008     of the State Commission Maharastra)        1. M/S. SHEWALKAR DEVELOPERS LIMITED & ANR.  Having its office at Laxmi Bhawan Square, WHC Road, Nagpur,  Maharashtra-440010  2. Mr. Ashutosh, S/o Ram Shewalkar,  R/o 80, Daga Layout, N.A.Road, Nagpur -440010
  Maharashtra ...........Appellant(s)  Versus        1. MADANMOHAN .   Proprietor of M/s Daga Investnent & Consultant, R/o. 12-A,"Kamanya",Dandige Layout, Shankar Nagpur, Nagpur-440010  Maharashtra  2. YASHWANT  S/o Yadabrao Kashettiwar  R/o.Flat No. 401, Jagat Millenium Apartment, Opp.R.T.O. Office, Amravati Road, Giripeth, Nagpur-10  Maharashtra  3. Aishwarya W/o Yashwant Kashettiwar,  R/o. Flat No. 401, Jagat Millenium Apartmemnt, Opp. R.T.O. Office Amravati Road, Giripeth, Nagpur-10  Maharashtra ...........Respondent(s) 

BEFORE:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER   HON'BLE DR. S.M. KANTIKAR, MEMBER For the Appellant : Mr. Gagan Sanghi & Mr. S.O. Ahmed, Advocates For the Respondent : For the Respondent/ Caveator : Ms. Vandana Sehgal & Mr. Anand Daga, Advocates -R-1 Dated : 13 Apr 2016 ORDER PER JUSTICE J.M. MALIK  

1.      We have heard the counsel for the parties at length.  Although, the appellants have delayed the matter for a long time, yet, in the interest of justice, we allow the appellants/OPs  to put up a few interrogatories.  It has also come to our notice that the Appellants have put up 95 interrogatories.  Again, the purpose is to procrastinate the case.

 

2.      However, in the interest of justice, we allow him to put up 20 interrogatories only, on 29.04.2016, before the State Commission.  Answer to the interrogatories should be given on 02.05.2015, by the Complainants.  Arguments be heard during the month of May and the case be disposed of within 15 days, thereafter.

 

3.      The counsel for the  complainants/respondents has explained that the history of this case goes to show that the appellant was given permission to file interrogatories as back as on 24.12.2014.  Almost two years have elapsed.  The time for disposal of this case is fixed by the Act itself, which is 180 days.  Again, it has been brought to our notice that,  we previously passed the order as back as on 25.04.2014 to the effect that this case should be expedited, but it is apparent that the appellants are not co-operating.  They find out one way or the other to delay the matter.

 

4.      In the interest of justice, the delay is condoned subject to payment of Rs.50,000/- as costs, which will  be paid to Mr. Madanmohan, complainant through demand draft directly on 29.04.2016.

 

5.      It is desired that the interrogatories must focus on and must germane to the controversy in question.

 

6.      It is also mentioned again that the OPs have admitted that they have already taken  Rs.57,00,000/-and are using that huge amount of the complainants since 2006.  The parties are requested to co-operate  and do not seek unnecessary adjournment, for which the State Commission is fully authorized  to reject that request.

 

7.      It is now transpired that the State Commission will be closed for summer vacation from 08.05.2016 to 06.06.2016.  Consequently, we request the State Commission to take up the case on day-to-day basis and decide the same before 08.05.2016. No adjournment, under the circumstances, should be granted at all.

8.      The First Appeal stands disposed of. Parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 29.04.2016.

  ......................J J.M. MALIK PRESIDING MEMBER ...................... DR. S.M. KANTIKAR MEMBER