NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/264/2018

BRANCH MANAGER, ALLAHABAD BANK - Complainant(s)

Versus

BALESHWAR PRASAD MISHRA & 2 ORS. - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. SONDHI NARULA DALAL & ASSOCIATES

08 Mar 2018

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 264 OF 2018
 
(Against the Order dated 14/11/2017 in Appeal No. 829/2016 of the State Commission Uttar Pradesh)
1. BRANCH MANAGER, ALLAHABAD BANK
BRANCH RANIA, AKBARPUR, RAMABAI NAGAR,
KANPUR RURAL
UTTAR PRADESH
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. BALESHWAR PRASAD MISHRA & 2 ORS.
S/O. LT. KALADIN MISHRA, R/O. VILLAGE CHIRANA, TEHSIL AKBARPUR,
DISTRICT-RAMABAI NAGAR,
UTTAR PRADESH
2. SANTOSH KUMAR MISHRA
S/O. BALESHWAR PRASAD MISHRA, R/O. VILLAGE CHIRANA, TEHSIL AKBARPUR,
DISTRICT-RAMABAI NAGAR
UTTAR PRADESH
3. GAURAV TRACTORS
PUTTAN MARKET AKBARPUR, THROUGH ITS PARTNER, SH. AVDHESH KUMAR OMAR, R/O. 384, K. BLOCK KIDWAI NAGARPUR
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. DR. S.M. KANTIKAR,PRESIDING MEMBER

For the Petitioner :
Ms. Sangeeta Sondhi, Advocate
Ms. Suranjika Jena, Advocate
For the Respondent :

Dated : 08 Mar 2018
ORDER

Heard.

          The State Commission dismissed the appeal in default of the appellant and passed the following order:-

None responds for the parties. Appellant has remained absent on 07-11-2016, 09-01-2017, 16-08-2017 and today on 14-11-2017.

 

In view of above it appears that appellant is not interested to press this appeal.

 

Appellant has filed this appeal with delay condonation application but perusal of record shows that the free certified copy of impugned judgment and order has been issued to the appellant on 13-04-2016 and appeal has been filed on 25-04-2016. Thus, the appeal is within time but appellant has not appeared consecutively for four dates as mentioned above to press this appeal.

 

In view of above appeal is dismissed in default of appellant.”

 

          It is transpired that the respondent was absent on 14.11.2017.  Therefore, there is no need to serve any notice to the respondent in this matter.  The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the counsel appointed by them could not appear before the State Commission.  The State Commission has not decided the appeal on merits, therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter is remitted back to the State Commission subject to payment of cost of ₹25,000/- by the petitioner Bank to the respondent/complainant by way of Demand Draft within four weeks.

 

          Both the parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 10.05.2018 for further proceedings.

          The State Commission shall proceed with the matter after confirmation of the cost paid by the petitioner/appellant and requested to decide it expeditiously.  Copy of this order be given ‘dasti’.          

 
......................
DR. S.M. KANTIKAR
PRESIDING MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.