SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.K.SIVAKUMAR SAPATHI – Appellant
Versus
BABU NAIDU – Respondent
CRP 323/2018



Advocates:
['M/S S ARIVAZHAGAN', '', 'T ARIVARASAN', 'MOHAMMED ABUBAKKAR SIDDIQ', 'm/s a arumugam', '', 'c meera arumugham', 'sravanam subhasini', 'R BABU NAIDU', 'R- THE PRESIDENT', 'R - TAPAL NOT YET RETURNED', 'EITHER SERVED OR UNSERVED', 'SUBMITTED']

CRP (NPD) No.323 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19.07.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

C.R.P (NPD) No.323 of 2018

and

C.M.P.No.1762 of 2018

S.K.Sivakumar Sapathi

... Petitioner

Vs.

1. Babu Naidu

2. R.Anguraj Naidu

3. G.Srinivasa Naidu

4. N.S.Vijayakumar Naidu

Arulmigu Devisree Ellamman

Devasthanan heredity Trustees

5. K.Baskar Naidu (President)

R.Gunasekaran Naidu (Deceased)

6. R.Udhayakumar @ Balu (Treasurer)

7. The President

Walajapath Taluk Consumer,

Welfare Association and Protection Society

Pillaiyar Kovil Street,

Uthukadu Village & Post,

Kancheepuram District.

... Respondents

1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

CRP (NPD) No.323 of 2018

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India, to set aside the order dated 12.10.2017 in SR.No.361

of 2017 in C.C.No.48 of 2013 passed by the District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Forum at Chengalpet.

For Petitioner

: Mr.S.Arivazhagan

For Respondents : Mr.A.Arumugam (for R-3 to R-6)

Notice Served (No Appearance)

(for R-1 and R-7)

: Not Ready in Notice (For R-2)

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition is filed as against order dated 12.10.2017

in SR.No.361 of 2017 in C.C.No.48 of 2013 passed by the District

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Chengalpet.

2. As against the order passed by the District Consumer Rederessal

Forum, Chengalpet, there is an appeal remedy under Section 41 of the

Consumer Protection Act before the State Commission. Therefore, this Civil

Revision Petition is not maintainable.

3. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However,

the petitioner is at liberty to file an appeal before the State Commission and

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

CRP (NPD) No.323 of 2018

the period of the pendency of this Civil Revision Petition may be excluded

while calculating the limitation to file an appeal. Consequently, the

connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

19.07.2021

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Index : Yes/No

kv

To

1. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,

Chengalpet.

2. The Section Officer,

V.R. Section, High Court of Madras.

3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

CRP (NPD) No.323 of 2018

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.

Kv

C.R.P (NPD) No.323 of 2018

19.07.2021

4/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top