Back
SUBHASH CHANDRA, SADHNA SHANKER
Mahboob Alam Qureshi – Appellant
Versus
TDI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER
Dr. Sadhna Shanker, Member.—The present appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short ‘the Act’) by Mr. Mahboob Alam Qureshi and Mr. Javed Alam Qureshi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘complainants’) assailing the Order dated 01.05.2017 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’) in complaint No. 1129 of 2015 whereby the complaint was dismissed as barred by limitation.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants (hereinafter referred to as the ‘complainants’) and the learned counsel for the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the ‘builder company’) and perused the memorandum of appeal.
3. There is a delay of 21 days in filing the present appeal.
In the interest of justice and considering the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
4. The facts, in brief, are that the complainants booked a plot measuring 350 sq. yds. in Future Township Project TDI City and deposited a sum of Rs.5,42,500/-, being 20% of basic price, by cheque dated 27.08.2005 and opted for option-II whereby the compla
(1) Delay - The delay of each and every day has to be explained.(2) Due Diligence - The basic test to determine whether the delay is reasonable or whether the party has been acting with due diligence....
(1) Condonation of Delay – According to State Commission, the appellant has miserably failed to give any acceptable and cogent sufficient reasons to condone such delay.(2) Prescribed period – The app....
Sufficient Cause – ‘Sufficient cause’ means that the party should not have acted in a negligent manner or there was a want of bona fide on its part and the applicant must satisfy the Court that he wa....
(1) Repeal of law – The repeal of a law shall not affect the previous operation of any enactment i.e. the proceedings under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 shall continue for cases which had been filed....
(1) It has been consistently held by Supreme Court that issue of limitation is an issue of jurisdiction.(2) Serious issue relating to maintainability of complaint by Respondents as it has been specif....
State Commission – The appellant is a duly constituted legal entity and is not an individual consumer which had contested the matter for nearly 8 years before the State Commission.
Delay - The complaint was filed after delay of more than 954 days. The grounds stated by the Complainant are devoid of merit, hence not acceptable.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
