Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.16 seconds)State Of Tripura & Ors vs Arabinda Chakraborty & Ors on 21 April, 2014
11. Accordingly, the District Forum examined the whole issue and found that the complaint has been filed with a delay of about four years and no application for condonation of delay was also submitted, therefore, complaint was dismissed as time barred. Moreover, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Tripura & Ors. Vs. Arabinda Chakraborty & Ors., decided on 21.04.2014 (SC), has held the following:-
Mahesh Nensi Shah vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. on 7 March, 2006
13. The same view has been taken by this Commission in Mahesh Nensi Shah Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., III (2006) CPJ 414 NC. It has been observed that:-
Jaikishan Aggarwal (Total Blind) vs Greater Noida Industrial Devp. ... on 23 July, 2014
"4. This Court in Anshul Aggarwal v. NOIDA, (2011) CPJ 63 (SC) has explained the scope of condonation of delay in a matter where the special Courts/ Tribunals have been constituted in order to provide expeditious remedies to the person aggrieved and Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is one of them. Therefore, this Court held that while dealing with the application for condonation of delay in such cases the Court must keep in mind the special period of limitation prescribed under the statute (s).
1