Showing : 151-160 of 188 Results

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2002
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 21, Rule 34-- Decree for execution of conveyance - Defendant neither applied for setting aside ex parte decree nor did he challenge the same in appeal - He cannot be allowed to raise any objection in execution...........
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2002
Details
Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5-- Condonation of delay in filing appeal - Plea of delayed knowledge of ex parte decree as came to know from Court official that case decided ex parte - Just an after thought when appeal filed through same counsel who had earlier pleaded No Instructions in lower Court - No sufficient cause to condone..........
UTTAR PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUCKNOW
Year of decision: 2002
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 17-- Revision - Ex parte order - District Forum passing the impugned order, though ex parte , yet based on merits of the case and a reasoned one - Same cannot be challenged in the revision - It was for the revisionist to have filed an appeal against the impugned order...........
UTTAR PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUCKNOW
Year of decision: 2002
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15-- Ex parte order- No provision in the Act to set aside the ex parte order passed on merit - Only course open is to file an appeal u/s 15 of the Act...........
PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Year of decision: 2001
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15-- Appeal - Condonation of delay - Delay of 410 days in filing the appeal - Ground taken that applicant/appellant had no notice or information about the pendency of the complaint which was illegally allowed by the District Forum vide impugned ex parte order - Record of the District Forum revealing..........
PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Year of decision: 2001
Details
Ex-parte order-- Appeal against - District Forum simply relied upon the word refusal written on the envelope in order to arrive at a conclusion that the appellant were served in this case - Neither there is any stamp of the postal authorities nor any name mentioned on the envelope as to who was the official who..........
UTTAR PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUCKNOW
Year of decision: 2001
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 17(b),15-- Revision - Appeal - Ex-parte order on merits passed directing the petitioner OP to make payment of Gratuity and GPF - Preliminary objection taken that revision filed against the order not competent - Plea of the petitioner OP that revision lies as matter relates to jurisdiction which has been..........
DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Year of decision: 2001
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 17-- Ex parte order - Review/recall of order - Application for alleging fraud - Held that the remedy for the applicant was to challenge the order in appeal if so advised and not by way of filing the present application - Application dismissed as not maintainable...........
PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Year of decision: 2001
Details
Debentures-- Non-payment of - Complaint filed - Opposite parties filing written statement and admitting that the payment of debentures could not be made to the complainant due to poor financial position - However, at a later stage, none appearing on behalf of the OPs before the District Forum - District Forum..........
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Year of decision: 2001
Details
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15-- Ex parte order - Appeal - Appellant proceeded ex parte as the summon sent not accepted - The cover returned by the post office has an endorsement which is not clear - Having regard to the averment in the affidavit that during the relevant time the appellant was away, the appellant/first OP can be..........

Showing : 151-160 of 188 Results