Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
C. VISWANATH, PM, JUSTICE RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA, M
SUBRATA ROY – Appellant
Versus
RAJESH CHANANA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. maintainability of appeal under consumer protection act. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. facts regarding the issuance of the bailable warrant. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. discussion on the nature of interlocutory orders. (Para 5 , 7 , 9) |
| 4. court's reasoning on appealability of interlocutory orders. (Para 6) |
| 5. final conclusion of the appeal. (Para 8) |
1. Heard Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi, Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Neha Gupta, Advocate for the appellant, on maintainability of the appeal under Section 27A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 or under Section 73 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 .
2. This appeal has been filed against the order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan at Jaipur dated 18.11.2020 passed in Contempt Application No.30 of 2020, Rajesh Channa Vs. Sanjay Saxena & Ors, issuing bailable warrant of Rs.50,000/- against the appellant and two other opposite parties in the application and fixed 13.01.2021 for appearance.
3. The office has submitted report that this appeal has been filed with delay of 342 days. The appellant has filed an application (i.e. I.A. No. 9394 of 2021) for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. It has been stated that Supreme Court
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
