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

2010 Supreme(Mad) 3388

G.RAJASURIA
Vijay Constructions – Appellant
Versus
P. R. Leena Mary – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:M. Balasubramanian, Advocate.
For the Respondents: --------

Judgment :-

1. Inveighing the exparte order dated 04.03.2010 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chennai (North), Mylapore, Chennai-4 in C.C.No.202 of 2008, this civil revision petition is focussed.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner regarding maintainability.

3. At the outset itself, I would like observe that this court has no jurisdiction to entertain this revision in view of the earlier two decisions of this court reported in 1. 2002(1) CTC 15 (Chairman and Managing Director, Indian Overseas Bank, Madras 600 002 and two others vs. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Madras1 and another) and

2. 2006(2) CTC 709 (R.Jaivel, the President Mettupatti Multi Purpose Workers Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd., Namakkal vs. State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by the Superintending Engineer, PWD, Vellore) and certain excerpts from those two decisions would run thus:

1. 2002(1) CTC 15 (Chairman and Managing Director, Indian Overseas Bank, Madras 600 002 and two others vs. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Madras1 and another)

"8. As far as the first submission is concerned,it is settled law that before approaching this court under Arti






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