SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

M.S.RANE, R.N.VARHADI
BABANRAO NARAYAN DESHMUKH – Appellant
Versus
ASHOK GANGARAM SAPKAL – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Applicant :Mr. G.V. Ranganathan, Advocate.
For the Respondents: None.

ORDER

Mr. Justice M.S. Rane, President—All these applications are sequel to the common order dated 21st May, 2001 passed by District Forum Buldhana in execution application in respect of main order in the complaints. The execution proceedings were required to be adopted because of the non-compliance of the order. The applicant is common in all five applications who has challenged the order of the District Forum wherein warrant of arrest under Section 27 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been issued against the applicants. It is to be stated that impugned order in the complaints stands unchallenged. The said order have not been fully complied with. That being so, the issuance of process under Section 27 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the District Forum cannot be faulted.

2. The learned Advocate for the applicants submitted that now the new Managing Body have taken over the Pat Sanstha which has making efforts to meet the liabilities under the awards. We wish to clarify that the applicant will be at liberty to approach the District Forum Buldhana in this respect and if so did, the Forum shall consider the same on merits.

3. Since, however, as per our interim order dated 29.5.200






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top