Circuit Bench Nagpur

StateCommission

AEA/21/1

M.S. PRIDE REAL ESTATE AND DEVELOPERS - Complainant(s)

Versus

PUSHPA MADHUKAR SENGRAPHWAR - Opp.Party(s)

P.R. BHURE

08 Mar 2021

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
MAHARASHTRA NAGPUR CIRCUIT BENCH
NAGPUR
 
Appeal Execution Application No. AEA/21/1
( Date of Filing : 28 Jan 2021 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 16/10/2019 in Case No. EA/19/43 of District Additional DCF, Nagpur)
 
1. M.S. PRIDE REAL ESTATE AND DEVELOPERS
R.O.PLOT NO. 2, SUSHIL WEST HIGH COURT ROAD, IN FROUNT OF NEERI COLONY, LAXMI NAGAR, NAGPUR 440015
NAGPUR
MAHARASHTRA
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. PUSHPA MADHUKAR SENGRAPHWAR
R.O. PLOT NO.29, HOUSE NO.1 HUDKESHWAR ROAD, BEHIND HOUSE OF MANOHAR KADU, HUDKESHWAR NAGPUR 440034
NAGPUR
MAHARASHTRA
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. A. Z. KHWAJA PRESIDING MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 08 Mar 2021
Final Order / Judgement

Per Shri A.Z.Khwaja, Hon’ble Presiding Member.

      Mr. P.R.Bhure, advocate is present for appellant. Mr. Mishrikotkar, advocate has appeared for respondent today and filed vakalatnama. Mr. Mishrikotkar, learned advocate has also orally submitted that present appellant M.S. Pride Real Estate and Developers has already filed one appeal bearing No.A/19/365 and the same is already pending on record. He has also place on record Confonet copy of proceedings. Advocate Mr. Bhure has sought time to take necessary instructions from the appellant.Accordingly time is granted to take necessary instructions. Subsequently Shri Bhure learned advocate for the appellant has appeared in afternoon and has sought permission to withdraw the present appeal. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that he had preferred the appeal solely on the instructions given by the wife of appellant as the appellant was lodged in prison. Appellant is present and he has also filed the pursis that he was not aware of the previous appeal, but this statement does not appear to be correct. We have called the record of the earlier appeal No.365/2019 which also shows that the present appellant himself had preferred the earlier appeal challenging the same order  Dt.16/10/2019 passed by the learned Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Nagpur. However, during the course of hearing the learned advocate for the appellant has expressed apology for the same and so we feel that no further action needs to be taken on this conduct of the appellant. It is clear that the appellant had suppressed the material facts having appeal bearing No.A/19/365. We have also heard Mr.Mishrikotkar, learned advocate for respondent on this aspect. In the totality of the things it is clear that the present appeal itself is not tenable in law. However since the appellant has tendered the apology through advocate and has sought permission to withdraw the appeal, permission is accordingly granted. Appeal is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution and is disposed of. Stay granted earlier is vacated. Bail granted earlier is hereby stands cancelled.   

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. A. Z. KHWAJA]
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.