Back
TASHI RABSTAN, MOHAN LAL
Akona Engineering Private Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Pal Construction – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. The petitioner in the present petition has questioned the order dated 02.04.2013 passed by the J&K State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jammu in complaint No. 3324/22/09/2011 titled Pal Construction Company Vs. Akona Engineering Private Limited whereby the complaint, which was dismissed on 16.01.2013, has been restored back.
2. The limited question that arises for consideration and on which the present petition has been filed, is as to whether the J&K State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, has the power to review its ex parte order and to restore the petition dismissed for non-appearance.
3. Objections to the writ petition have been filed by the respondents, but, none has appeared to argue the matter.
4. The issue involved in the present petition has already been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment reported in (2011) 9 SCC 541 titled Rajeev Hitendra Pathank and others Vs. Achyut Kasinath Karekar and another. As a matter of fact, initially the Hon'ble Supreme Court had taken a view in Jyotsana Arvind Kumar Shah and others Vs. Bombay Hospital Trust (1999)4 SCC 325 in which it was held that the State Commission did not have power to review or r
The main legal point established is that the State Commission does not have the power to restore a complaint dismissed for non-prosecution, as settled by the Apex Court and the provisions of the J&K ....
1. Power of State Commission - State Commission has not been expressly or impliedly conferred with any power or authority to recall any final order passed, be it an ex parte order or an order of dism....
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
