Dismissed

Milind Dayaram Waykole and Others v. Assistant Registrar, Co. Operative Societies, Jalgaon and Others

Bombay HC11 Aug 2016WP/1635/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In the absence of the petitioners, the court disposed of the writ petition seeking discharge from compliance proceedings. Relying on precedent, the court held the grievance could not be considered but noted the petitioner retains the remedy of appeal.

What did the court decide?

None granted; Writ petition disposed of routinely due to absence of petitioners.

Milind Dayaram Waykole and Others Vs Assistant Registrar… — Consumer Protection | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

905 sr. no..odt

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 1635 OF 2015

¶5

MILIND DAYARAM WAYKOLE AND OTHERS VERSUS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, JALGAON AND OTHERS

¶6

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. B.A. Chavan

¶7

AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar. Advocate for respondent Nos. 4,7,9 to 11 : Mr. D.B. Shinde

¶8

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & K.K. SONAWANE, JJ. DATE : 11^th AUGUST , 2016.

¶9

PER COURT:

¶10

1] The matter was listed yesterday. None appeared for the petitioners. However, it was adjourned. Today also, when the matter was called out, none appears for the petitioners.

¶11

2] Petitioners seek discharge from the liability and seeks further relief that the name of the petitioners be removed from the compliance proceedings filed under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

¶12

3] Learned AGP states that the petitioner has the remedy of appeal if the judgment and order of the Consumer Court is to be challenged and as far as the liability is concerned, learned AGP relies upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, in " Mandabai Sambhaji Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra" reported in 2011(4) Mh.L.J. 790 , to submit that the District Consumer Forum has the jurisdiction to try and entertain the complaint even against the Directors of the society.

¶13

4] Learned counsel for respondent No.4 relies upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of Nivedita Sharma Vs. Cellular Operators, delivered in Civil Appeal No. 10706 of 2011, dated December 7, 2011, to submit that remedy of appeal is provided to the petitioner.

¶14

905 sr. no..odt

¶15

{2}

¶16

4] In view of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mandabai (supra) the grievance of the petitioner cannot be considered. However, petitioner is at liberty to file such application in compliance proceedings, as is permissible in law.

¶17

5] Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶18

[K.K. SONAWANE] JUDGE

¶19

[S.V. GANGAPURWALA] JUDGE.

¶20

grt/-

Milind Dayaram Waykole and Others v. Assistant Registrar, Co. Operative Societies, Jalgaon and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Milind Dayaram Waykole and Others v. Assistant Registrar, Co. Operative Societies, Jalgaon and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Salim Daulat Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Yogkshem Co. Operative Housing Society Ltd, Parbhani Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vasudeo Bhikaji Funde Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Mirkale Vasant Namdevrao Vs the Housing Development Finance Co. Ltd, Mumbai

Idara E Bahboodi Niswan, Education Society, Aurangabad Vs the Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad and Another

Marotrao Nagorao Shinde Vs State of Maharashtra and Others