Skip to content

Advocatetanmoy Law Library

Encyclopedia & Legal Research

Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Antigua & Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia & Herzegovina Botswana Brazil British V. Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Carrib. Netherlands Cayman Island Chile China Colombia Congo DRC Congo Republic Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czechia Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El alvador Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France French Polyn Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran ​Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritius Mexico Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar/Burma Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Réunion Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Lucia St Vincent & Grenadines Samoa Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Somalia South Africa South Korea Spain Sri Lanka St. Kitts & Nevis Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Togo Trinidad & Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan UAE U.S. Virgin Islands Uganda Ukraine UK United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vatican City Venezuela Vietnam Yemen Zambia

  • Home
    • SITE UPDATES
  • Constitutions
  • Dictionary
  • Law Exam
  • Pleading
  • Index
  • Notifications
  • Indian Law
  • Articles
  • Home
  • 2018
  • January
  • 15
  • M/s. Mangalam Homes & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Joy Kaliyavumkal & ANR. etc[SC 2018 January]
  • CIVIL

M/s. Mangalam Homes & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Joy Kaliyavumkal & ANR. etc[SC 2018 January]

2 min read

© Advocatetanmoy Law Library

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
image_printPrint

KEYWORDS:- National Consumer Forum-

Capture

DATE : January 10, 2018

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

M/s. Mangalam Homes & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Joy Kaliyavumkal & ANR. etc.

[Civil Appeal Nos.133-135 of 2018 @ Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.22802-22804 of 2016]

Deepak Gupta J.

1. Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. These appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 06.01.2015 and 08.12.2015, whereby the appeals filed by the complainants (Respondents herein) and the review petitions filed by the petitioners were allowed. Each set of complainants was awarded Rs.14 lakhs as compensation along with interest @12% per annum w.e.f. 06.09.2011 on the ground that the appellants (builder) had compromised a similar matter with one Shri P.V. Babu in a civil suit. In view of the decision which we propose to take, it is not necessary to set out the facts of the case in detail.

4. The main ground raised is that the appellants herein were wrongly proceeded ex parte and only on this ground the order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (‘the National Commission’ for short) should be set aside and the matter be remanded to the National Commission to decide the same after hearing both the sides.

5. On behalf of the appellants it is urged that the appellants had received notice dated 08.07.2014 from the National Commission and, thereafter, they had sent a reply on 25.07.2014 praying that the matter may be heard in the Camp Sitting of the National Commission at Bengaluru. According to the appellants, no reply was received to this letter. On behalf of the claimants/respondents it is urged that the appellants were aware of the case and that the matter had been settled on the basis of a compromise arrived at by the appellants with another consumer and there is no need to set aside the order. After going through the record we find that the appellants had made a request that their matter be heard at Bengaluru.

Copies of the orders passed thereafter have been placed on record and the record does not show that the appellants were ever informed that their request for having the matter heard at Bengaluru was either accepted or rejected. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the National Commission erred in not issuing fresh notice to the appellants. Accordingly, the order of the National Commission is set aside and the matter is remitted to the National Commission for hearing the same on merits.

6. Vide order dated 22.07.2016 while issuing notice we had directed the appellants to deposit the amount as awarded by the National Commission. The said amount shall remain in deposit and disbursal of the same shall abide by the final decision of the National Commission.

7. The parties are directed to appear before the National Commission at Delhi on 12th February, 2018.

8. With these directions the appeals stand disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

 (Madan B. Lokur)

 (Deepak Gupta)

New Delhi

January 10, 2018

image_printPrint

Related

Continue Reading

Previous: Shyam Narayan Chouksey Vs. Union of India & Others [SC 2018 January]
Next: I.C. Sharma Vs. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd [SC 2018 January]

Updates

Interpretation NO.748  [ Same-Sex Marriage Case ]-Judicial Yunan-24/05/2017 taiwan 1

Interpretation NO.748  [ Same-Sex Marriage Case ]-Judicial Yunan-24/05/2017

Fake letters of St Paul to Seneca and fake letters of Seneca to St Paul (1863) 2

Fake letters of St Paul to Seneca and fake letters of Seneca to St Paul (1863)

পতিতার আত্মচরিত – কুমারী শ্রীমতী মানদা দেবী প্রণীত (Autobiography of a prostitute by Manada Devi-1929) Bangla meye 3

পতিতার আত্মচরিত – কুমারী শ্রীমতী মানদা দেবী প্রণীত (Autobiography of a prostitute by Manada Devi-1929)

U.S strategy towards sub-saharan Africa-08/08/2022 USA 4

U.S strategy towards sub-saharan Africa-08/08/2022

Epistle of Epicurus to Herodotus (260BCE) 5

Epistle of Epicurus to Herodotus (260BCE)

Will of Epicurus (270 BCE) 6

Will of Epicurus (270 BCE)

Epicurus and his 40 Doctrines (300 BCE) 7

Epicurus and his 40 Doctrines (300 BCE)

CONSTITUTION IPC CRPC CPC EVIDENCE DV POCSO IT IP TP JUVENILE CONTRACT SPECIFIC RELIEF CONSUMER ARBITRATION COMPANY LIMITATION FAMILY LAWS POLLUTION CONTROL BANKING INSURANCE

DOCUMENTS GLOSSARIES JUDGMENTS

  • E-Books 2022  More Documents

Search Google

  • BIBLIOGRAPHY
  • HISTORY
  • PHILOSOPHY
  • RELIGION
  • HINDU LAW
  • HUMAN RIGHTS
  • ENVIRONMENT
  • MEDICAL
  • MUSLIM LAW
  • Contact Us
  • About
  • Disclaimers
  • RSS
  • Privacy Policy
  • Forum
© Advocatetanmoy by Law library.
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.