← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/6468/2017

Nirmal Kumar Pandey v. Aditya Contruction Company India Pvt Ltd And ORS.

2017-08-01Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru2 pages

$~49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6468/2017 NIRMAL KUMAR PANDEY ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr Karunesh Tandon, Advocate.

versus ADITYA CONTRUCTION COMPANY INDIA PVT LTD AND ORS.

..... Respondents Through

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 01.08.2017 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that an appropriate direction be issued to the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) to cancel the date of hearing fixed on 31.10.2017 in Complaint No.593/2014 titled as 'Nirmal Kumar Pandey v. M/s Aditya Construction Company India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.' and the complaint be disposed of within a period of two months.

2.

The petitioner's grievance is that despite his best efforts, the petitioner has not been able to secure the disposal of the aforementioned complaint. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the order dated 30.05.2016 whereby the NCDRC had listed the matter for final hearing on 30.03.2017 and had further directed the parties to file short synopsis of their submissions not exceeding 3 to 4 pages with cross references and pagination as per court file within a period of six weeks from

that date. On 30.03.2017 (that is the next date of hearing), NCRDC noted that the written synopsis had not been filed by the opposite parties and a statement was made on their behalf that they would be filing the synopsis during the course of the day. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned to 31.10.2017.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that respondent no.1, M/s Aditya Construction Company India Private Ltd., has been deliberately delaying the matter and this is plainly evident from the order dated 30.03.2017. He submits that in these circumstances, no indulgence ought to be granted to the said respondent.

4.

This Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter as this Court is sure that the NCRDC is conscious of the grievance of the petitioner and would not grant unnecessary adjournments. Since the matter is listed on 31.10.2017 for final arguments, it is expected that the same shall be taken up and decided as expeditiously as possible.

5.

The petition is disposed of.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J AUGUST 01, 2017 MK