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

R.K.AGRAWAL
Rahul Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Dremz and Aspirations – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Avnish Dave, Advocate Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Advocate

ORDER

The present Revision Petition has been filed under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the Impugned Order dated 18.05.2022 passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as State Commission) in Appeal No. 98 / 2022, whereby the State Commission condoned the delay in filing the Appeal and directed to withdraw the Revision Petition instituted before the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court before the next date of hearing, in case, the Appellant wanted to pursue the Appeal before the State Commission.

2. Brief facts of the case are that an MOU was entered between Rahul Sharma, the Complainant/Petitioner herein, who is a professional artist, and the Dremz And Aspiration, Opposite Party Company/Respondent herein, who is engaged in live show launching, album recording etc. According to the said MOU, the Petitioner has to make a payment of Rs.15,00,000/- in instalments to the Respondent Company. It was alleged that despite having received a sum of Rs.12,00,000/-, the Respondent Company miserably failed to give even a single chance of singing to the Petitioner. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Resp

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