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

S.N.KAPOOR, P.D.SHENOY
UNION OF INDIA – Appellant
Versus
VIJAY LAXMI – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Petitioner:Mr. S.S. Sabharwal, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.

ORDER

Mr. Justice S.N. Kapoor, Presiding Member—We have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner on the application for condonation of delay of 65 days as well as on merits

2. This revision is directed against an order passed by the Rajasthan Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur in Appeal No. 1341 of 2004 dated 28.9.2004 confirming the order of the District Forum.

3. The only ground on which the delay of 65 days is being sought to be condoned is as under:

“That after receiving the certified copy of the order dated 28.9.2004, the petitioner department immediately started the process. The legal opinion was obtained from the Government Counsel immediately thereafter the matter was referred to the Department of Post, Head Quarter, Delhi, thereafter the matter was referred to the Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law and Justice. The Department of Legal Affairs appointed the Government Counsel to pursue the matter and thereafter, the matter has been discussed and the present petition is being prepared. The above mentioned process had taken much time, due to which the accompanying Revision Petition could not be filed within the prescribed period of limitation and some de











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