Applicants moved for a review of an order recalled to appear before Consumer Forums. The bench dismissed the application and directed petitioners to file replies to the show cause notice under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE
Criminal Application No.105 of 2006
In
Criminal Writ Petition No.602 of 1999
Vinod Lalchand Doshi & ors.
Applicants
Vs.
Union of India & ors.
Respondents
Mrs.R.R.Dhuru with Mr.R.C.Dhuru for applicant.
CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & SMT.R.S.DALVI,JJ.
July 14, 2006.
P.C.
. We have heard the learned counsel for the
review petitioners and we have noted from the record that the impugned warrant was issued for causing presence of the petitioners before the District and State Forums and to reply to the show cause notice issued under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. We, therefore, do not see any reason to recall our order dated 13/1/2006 and it is for the
petitioners to approach before the respective forums
and file their reply.
. The application is rejected summarily.
(SMT.R.S.DALVI,J.)
(B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)
Vinod Lalchand Doshi & ors.
Union of India & ors.
B.H.MARLAPALLE
SMT.R.S.DALVI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
