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

DEEPA SHARMA, SUBHASH CHANDRA
Municipal Corporation Bilaspur – Appellant
Versus
Naveen Chopda – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Pranjal Kishore, Advocate

ORDER

Deepa Sharma, Presiding Member—The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order of the State Commission dated 30.08.2018 in Appeal No. FA/328/2018 whereby the petitioners have challenged the order of the District Forum dated 07.03.2018 in complaint case no. CC/345/2016 filed by the respondent.

2. Since the present Revision Petition has been filed with a delay of 365 days, IA No. 18924 of 2019, an application seeking condonation of delay has been filed alongwith this revision petition.

3. We have heard the arguments on the application seeking condonation of delay. It is submitted by the petitioner that delay had occurred because the Bilaspur Development Authority had been defunct for almost 15 years and it had become very difficult for it to trace the documents and understand the current and practical aspects for the implementation of the orders and for getting translation of the orders done. It is submitted that they had also learnt that flat allotted to the complainant had been illegally occupied by someone else, since the complainant had failed to occupy the same and so they found it difficult to get the order executed and hand over the

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