BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.) vs SAHIL DAWAR

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

judgment-img


NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI


REVISION PETITION NO. 975 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. ASHOK KUMAR

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 976 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. SANTOSH KUMARI

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 977 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. BHARAT DAWAR

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 978 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. BALDEV RAJ

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 979 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. SARITA KUMARI

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 980 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. SAHIL DAWAR

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 981 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. SAHIL DAWAR

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 982 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. ASHOK KUMAR

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 983 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. SOURAV KUMAR

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 984 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. BHARAT DAWAR

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 985 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. SARITA KUMARI

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 986 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. SANTOSH KUMARI

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 987 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. BALDEV RAJ

...........Respondent(s)


REVISION PETITION NO. 988 OF 2020

(Against the Order dated 18/05/2020 in Appeal No. 238/2019 of the State Commission Chandigarh)

1. BIG BAZAAR (FUTURE RETAIL LTD.)

...........Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. BHARAT DAWAR

...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
	HON'BLE MR. DINESH SINGH,PRESIDING MEMBER

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Sudhir K. Makkar, Sr., Advocate along
with Ms. Saumya Gupta, Advocate and Ms. Yogita Rathore, Advocate

For the Respondent :

Dated : 22 Dec 2020

ORDER

O R D E R

HON’BLE MR. DINESH SINGH, PRESIDING MEMBER

Taken up through video conferencing.

1. These fourteen (14) Revision Petitions have been filed in challenge to the Order dated 18.05.2020 of The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.T., Chandigarh (the ‘State Commission’) in Appeals No. 238, No. 239, No. 240, No. 243, No. 244, No. 246, No. 2

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

SupremeToday Portrait Ad