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

M/S Megacity (Bengaluru) Developers vs Akbar Pasha on 20 April, 2023

  	 Cause Title/Judgement-Entry 	    	       KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION   BASAVA BHAVAN, BANGALORE.             Review Application No. RA/94/2022  ( Date of Filing : 23 Sep 2022 )  In  First Appeal No. A/1799/2018             1. M/s Megacity (Bengaluru) Developers  and builders Pvt. Ltd.,Mega Towers, No.120,K.H.Road, Bengaluru-560027Rep. by its Director ...........Appellant(s)   Versus      1. Akbar Pasha  S/o Late Suleman Shahib,Aged about 79 years,r/a No.165, 4th cross,J.H.B.C.S. layout,Bengaluru-560078 ...........Respondent(s)       	    BEFORE:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Huluvadi G. Ramesh PRESIDENT    HON'BLE MR. Krishnamurthy B.Sangannavar JUDICIAL MEMBER    HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Divyashree.M MEMBER            PRESENT:      Dated : 20 Apr 2023    	     Final Order / Judgement    

 Dtd.20.04.2023                                            RA/94/2022

 

 O R D E R

        BY Mr.K.B.SANGANNANAVAR : Pri.Dist & Session Judge (R) - JUDICIAL MEMBER.

 

This Review Application is filed U/s.50 of CPA, 2019 by the Petitioner/Complainant to review the order dtd.29.06.2022 passed by this Commission in A/1799/2018.

Learned counsel for Respondent, Review petitioner as party in person present. We heard on the memo filed on behalf of Review petitioner, since he submits that on 25.06.2022 learned conciliators recorded the terms of compromise and in view of settlement A/1799/2018 stands disposed off. Consequently set aside the order dtd.02.09.2003 passed in CC/622/2003 on the file of Bengaluru 3rd Addl., District Forum has to be implemented. It is to be noted herein that 2 conciliators have recorded such terms before Lokadalat, which cannot be reviewed by the Commission and if Commission has subsequently passed order in respect of sharing of interest which has no relevance. In other words not binds the parties to the compromised award. Accordingly held that the terms entered by the learned conciliators alone has to enforce and the Commission do not have power to review the order unilaterally. The contention of learned counsel for the Respondent that the Commission passed order on sharing interest has no relevance is held unaccepted. Accordingly RA stands disposed off.

   

Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties to the petition.

 
Lady Member            Judicial Member              President   

 

*NS*                 [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Huluvadi G. Ramesh]  PRESIDENT 
        [HON'BLE MR. Krishnamurthy B.Sangannavar]  JUDICIAL MEMBER 
        [HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Divyashree.M]  MEMBER