Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Judge XYZ, J
S.M. Eint Udyog – Appellant
Versus
Complainant – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revision petition challenging orders of lower forums. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. complainant's claim of non-delivery and retained funds. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. defense of denial of transaction by the petitioner. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. court's perspective on cause of action and delays. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. final dismissal with compliance instruction. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
1. This revision petition has been filed under S.58 (1)(b) of the Act 2019 in challenge to the Order dated 23.1.2023 of the State Commission in Appeal No. 22 of 2022 arising out of the Order dated 24.12.2021 of the District Commission in Complaint No. 10 of 2021.
2. We have heard the learned Counsel of the Petitioner and have perused the record including inter alia the Order dated 24.12.2021 of the District Commission, the impugned Order dated 23.1.2023 of the State Commission and the Petition.
3. The Complainant has been filed with the grievance which appears to be like this. The Complainant (Respondent herein) required the bricks for construction of his house and in that connection had contacted the Opp. Party (Petitioner herein). The brick rate was settled at the rate of Rs 2600 per thousand .The Complainant deposited Rs
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
