Back
A. P. SAHI, INDER JIT SINGH
Basant Kumar Katariya (Jain) – Appellant
Versus
Angarak Dev Deshmukh – Respondent
ORDER
Dr. Inder Jit Singh, Member—The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioners against Respondent as detailed above, under section 21 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 01.10.2015 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhattisgarh (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’), in First Appeal (FA) No. 177/2015 in which order dated 10.03.2015 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Consumer Complaint (CC) No. 311/2013 was challenged.
2. While the Revision Petitioners (hereinafter also referred to as Opposite Parties(OPs) were Appellants before the State Commission and OPs before the District Forum and the Respondent (hereinafter also referred to as Complainant) was Respondent before the State Commission and Complainant before the District Forum. Notice was issued to the Respondent on 15.06.2016. Parties filed Written Arguments on 21.06.2021 & 12.04.2023 (Petitioners) and 10.05.2023 respectively.
3. Brief facts of the case, as emerged from the RP, Order of the State Commission, Order of the District Forum and other case records are that: -
The complainants purc
Absence of Evidence – In the absence of evidence produced by the complainant in the form of terms of contract entered into between the parties, bills for such alleged items procured in excess, and ev....
The National Commission emphasized its limited revisional jurisdiction, requiring clear jurisdictional errors for interfering with concurrent findings of fact from lower forums.
National Commission in exercise of revisional jurisdiction cannot re-appreciate evidence led by parties like an appellate court.
Commercial Purpose — All shop rooms are commercial buildings, at the time of issuing building permits. This is not the deciding factor that the complainant was planning to use the shop for commercial....
The court affirmed that housing construction agreements fall under the Consumer Protection Act, establishing that both parties were bound by the definitions of 'consumer' and 'service'.
1) Cancellation of the Residential House by the Petitioner, instead of correction of defect in the building and further allotment of the same to the third party, certainly amounts to deficiency in se....
Bungalow Buyer’s Agreement – Direction for refund can be passed where agreement between parties has become difficult to be honoured.
Remand – Ordering a remand would cause additional hardships to the parties to the list as no useful purpose would be served in doing so.
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
