Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
R.K. AGRAWAL, PRESIDENT, S.M. KANTIKAR, MEMBER
M/S. HUBTOWN LTD. & ANR. – Appellant
Versus
VIMAL BHANNUDAS VARAK – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background and facts of the case (Para 1) |
| 2. state commission's confirmation of district forum (Para 10) |
| 3. judgment dismissal and jurisdiction adherence (Para 11 , 25) |
| 4. petitioner's claims of non-consumer status (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. rejection of provisional objections (Para 14) |
| 6. jurisdictional clarity on consumer rights (Para 15 , 16) |
| 7. affirmation of consumers' entitlement (Para 18) |
| 8. final assertion of petitioners' deficiency (Para 24) |
ORDER
1. The present batch of the Revision Petitions under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”), has been filed by the Petitioners/Opposite Parties in the Complaint before the District Forum, assailing the Common Order dated 12.10.2018, passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Mumbai (for short “the State Commission”) in First Appeal Nos. A/15/1001 to A/15/1031. By the impugned Order, the State Commission has dismissed all the First Appeals preferred by the Petitioners/Opposite Parties against the Common Order dated 30.04.2015 passed by the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, Mumbai Sub-Urban District (for short, “the District Forum”) in Complaint Nos. 08/2009 to 3
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
