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

Shornur Road Transport, Shoranur – Appellant
Versus
T. V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Ltd. – Respondent


ORDER

P.K. Shamsuddin, President These appeals raise a common question and therefore they were heard together and disposed of by a common order. The Appeal No.539/96 is filed against the order passed by the District Forum. Thrissur, in O.P. No. 1299/95 and the Appeal No. 540/96 is filed against the order passed by the same District Forum in O.P. No.1298/95. The complainants are the appellants.

2. The allegations contained in the complaint and the averments raised in the version are also similar. The complainant is a registered partnership firm represented by its Managing Partner. The complainant has branches and are having several buses plying on several routes.

The complainant in O.P. No. 1299/95 booked two passenger vehicle chassises with the opposite party as per order dated 25-2-1995 and an advance of Rs. 50,000/ - was also paid as directed by the opposite parties on that day. The complainant alleged that in the order given by the opposite parties it was clearly stated that the delivery of the vehicle would be made within 8 to 10 weeks from the date of the order. Subsequently as directed by the opposite parties the complainant paid the full costs of the two vehicles by two Demand















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