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

2023 Supreme(Online)(NCDRC) 1882

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
M/S. KRISHNA PARK – Appellant
Versus
SUREKHANEN MANUBHAI PATEL – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner: MR. PAWAN PRAKASH PATHAK
For the Respondent:

ORDER

1.      These 10 Revision Petitions, bearing No. RP/1408/2022, RP/1409/2022, RP/1410/2022, RP/1411/2022, RP/1412/2022, RP/1487/2022, RP/1488/2022, RP/1489/2022, RP/1490/2022 and RP/1491/2022 were filed by M/s Krishna Park and its Partners (Hereinafter referred to as the “Petitioners”/ “Opposite Parties”) against Pinkyben & Others (Hereinafter referred to as the “Respondents”/ “Complainants”). These Revisions Petitions challenge the Orders dated 27.07.2020 in FA/682/2016, FA/683/2016, FA/694/2016, FA/695/2016, FA/699/2016, FA/664/2016, FA/667/2016, FA/674/2016, FA/679/2016 and FA/666/2016 respectively, which were passed by the learned Gujarat State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”). The State Commission had partly allowed all the Appeals. In turn, these Appeals had been filed against the order of the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Surat, Gujarat (‘District Forum’, hereafter) dated 15.10.2016. Vide this order, the District Forum, had partly allowed the Complaints.

2.      Since the facts and questions of law involved in all the Revision Petitions are substantially similar, except for minor var

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