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

V.B.GUPTA, VINAY KUMAR
R. P. Oberoi – Appellant
Versus
Vinod Bahl – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant : Mr. R.P. Oberoi, in person.

ORDER

Vinay Kumar, Member—Complaint No.233 of 1994 was first decided by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission of Delhi, on 5.12.2005. Three appeals were filed against this order by the OPs, as well as the Complainant, which were decided by the National Commission on 27.4.2010. The matter was remanded back to the State Commission for fresh consideration and disposal. Accordingly, the matter was considered afresh by the State Commission and decided on 26.5.2011. The State Commission has dismissed the complaint, against which, the Complainant Shri R.P.Oberoi has filed the present appeal.

2. The appellant has chosen to conduct his case on his own and therefore has been heard in person. The record as produced by him, together with those submitted during the course of the present proceedings, have been perused and considered.

3. The appeal of Shri Oberoi was filed on 11.11.2011, with a delay of 124 days. In the application for conondation of this delay, the following explanation has been advanced by the appellant:-

“1. That the Appellant is 82 years old retired Civil Servant and has been fighting this case on his own for the last 17 yeaRs. He was not aware that the period of f

























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