PADMA VINOD BETAI V. M/S. ACKRUTI JAY CHANDAN JV

Padma Vinod Betai Vs. M/S Ackruti Jay Chandan JV

1. PADMA VINOD BETAI
123-A, JOLLY MAKER APARTMENTS NO.1, CUFFE
PARADE, COLABA,
Versus

1. M/S. ACKRUTI JAY CHANDAN JV
ACKRUTI TRADE CENTRE, ROAD NO. 7, MIDC,
ANDHERI (EAST)
MUMBAI-400093
Case No. : FIRST APPEAL NO. 1537 OF 2016

Date of Judgement : 05 December 2023

Judges : MR. SUBHASH CHANDRA,

               DR. SADHNA SHANKER

For Respondent : MR. VINAYAK SHARMA, ADVOCATE PROXY FOR MR. VIKAS MEHTA, ADVOCATE

Facts

  • This is a First Appeal filed by Padma Vinod Betai against the order dated 19/09/2016 passed in Complaint No. 3/2011 by the State Commission Maharashtra.
  • The original complaint was filed by Padma Vinod Betai against M/s Ackruti Jay Chandan JV regarding some consumer dispute. The State Commission passed an order dated 19/09/2016 which has been challenged in this appeal.

Arguments by Parties Appellant:

  • No arguments of the appellant are mentioned in the order. A proxy counsel sought further opportunity to file short synopsis on 05/12/2023.

Respondent:

  • No arguments on behalf of the respondent are mentioned.

It is observed by the National Commission that either no one has been appearing for the Appellant or a proxy counsel appeared on the last three dates of hearing.

  • The Commission noted that it appears the Appellant has lost interest in pursuing the matter.
  • In view of the above, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

    • Sections referred: None Laws referred: None

    Stml 1

    Download Court Copy : https://dreamlaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/task-23-nitishu.pdf

    Full text of Judgement :

    In this matter, proxy counsel appears on behalf of the Appellant today and seeks a further opportunity to file short synopsis.
    It is seen that either no one has been appearing for the Appellant or a proxy counsel appeared for the last three dates of hearing (01.07.2022, 28.12.2022 and 09.08.2023). It appears that the Appellant has lost interest in the matter.
    The Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.