Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Mr. Dinesh Singh, Presiding Member
Aparajith Bhandary v. Sunny Brooks (Now Samarkhand Property MGT. PVT. LTD.)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of revision petitions and initial procedures. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. issues regarding jurisdiction and merits of execution proceedings. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. concluding order and directives. (Para 9) |
1. Mr. Dinesh Singh, Presiding Member "These revision petitions (9 nos.) have been filed before this Commission under S.21(b) of the Act 1986 in challenge to the Order dated 7.4.2017 of the State Commission in revision petitions No. 46 to No. 56 of 2014 and No. 6 to No. 11 of 2015 arising out of the common Orders dated 18.9.2014 and dated 26.12.2014 of the District Commission in execution petitions No. 117, No. 118, No. 120, No. 122 to No. 124, No. 36, No. 19, No. 115, No. 116, No. 119, No. 18, No. 43, No. 121 and No. 196 of 2008 and No. 171 and No. 172 of 2013.
2. Learned proxy Counsel present on behalf of the revisionists requests for an adjournment, submitting that the learned Counsel is not available. Learned Counsel for the respondent is present, and submits that he has come from Bangaluru for the final hearing.
3. These revisions are pending since 2017. It is deemed appropriate to dispose them on the basis of the record and after hearing the Counsel
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
