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

PREM NARAIN
R. L. Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
Skynet Word Wide Express Pvt. Ltd – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Ram Niwas Buri, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1: NEMO
For the Respondents Nos.2 and 3: NEMO

ORDER

MA No.146 of 2017 has been filed for restoration of the revision petition No.1243 of 2010 which was dismissed in default vide order dated 02.11.2015 passed by this Commission. This revision petition was filed against the order dated 11.11.2009 of the State Commission passed in Appeal No.427 & 442 of 2007. The complainant as well as the opposite parties both filed revision petition being Nos.1243 of 2010 & 4541 of 2009 respectively before this Commission. Both the revision petitions were dismissed in default and for non-prosecution vide order dated 02.11.2015 passed by this Commission. MA has been filed on 27.03.2017. As per Regulation No. 14 (ii) of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005 only 30 days period is allowed to file the application for restoration. However in the present case restoration application has been filed with a delay of about 15 months. Along with MA, the application for condonation of delay has also been filed. A perusal of this application indicates that the applicant is putting all the blame on the concerned Advocate Ms. Aarohi Bhalla, Advocate, who was handling the case of the applicant. It has been stated that the applicant tried to contact his cou

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