I
IN THE IHGII COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANQESLORE W.P.No.623I OF 2038
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGAL0F§:E’.T.
mwnn THIS ms Sm mm or APRIL, ”
BEFORE
ma HON”BLE MR. JUSTl(§EA”f%;i{.?}%_T|L’ Ln X
WRIT PETITIOK No.62aT1 I (§>I& _-CON’V
BETWEEN:
JOSEPH CLIFFORD PINTO
SJQ JEROME PNTO V
AGED ABOUT 456 YEARS L
LEG CENTRE BUILDRQG ‘ V C’ a
COURT ROAEAUDUPE ” _ .
_ I F’ET£TlQNER
(By Sri ; KiSH0RE’SHEFT’Y__ 5:.._Af.?:V§_’.}(__2}fl\TE)
AND: >
1 wow O’FTi~£ i3I.A’ _ –
0&9? OF’ Face. 2534:; CjVlL.$EEPPLIES
:~zzw*.£>E;.H: —
REPRE2SENTEU”3Y ifs SESRETARY
2 ma uou#~1a:3?r2ecT xii-anéumen D£$PU’§’E8
V, EEQRESSAL FORUM, UVDUPI 5?610’§
4, _REFfRE$E{§TED 8′{“‘$’f3 PRESDENT
:3 1 ” ~ §’£N€3E§€TT_Fi3=s1JRO
” si{3.,JGHN T%$at;.RO
._ ‘ ._;s.zAJ0R’_5<AL1~'Ho0R VILLAGE
.?uDuP§'x_f
RE$P0NDENT~'S
" ' — ; 3;.sarw: ; c saésuzxamm, AQVGCATE I'-'GR R1 ;
_ Am R3 – semen 3
Hit
Ti-HS WRET PETITSON IS FELED UNDER ARTXILES 226 AND 227 OF
_ T _ THE {3ONsTETUT£0N 0:: uuaza maveme TD 39:: A$iDE THE IMPUG:-32:
'QRDER 3': 2:3:3.2m PASSE9 av R2 FORUM £N EXECiJTiON pmraon
i?4'1m; fliiifi CUL}R'i'(§FKAKNA'l;A1CA A'1'BANGKIUK£ W.}'.No.€a23l or 29:23
'\
IN THE 1111311 CGURT OF KARNATAICA AT IIANGALOFJL'. W.P.Ne.623i OF 2038
EPNOS. 201'2%? VSDE ANNEXA. AND TO STREKE DCWN SUBSECTJCN (3)
SF SECTION 27 OF THE CONSUMERS PROTECTDN ACT,
UNCONSTlTi.iTiONAL ANS VOID'
THIS wan PETETION comma on FQR PRELIMENAR'? HEA:2::E:é%uNV."'_"J H
'B' GROUP' THE BAY, THE COURT MADE THE FDLLOWtNG:,. ._
Petitioner in this
aside the impugned passed
by second :°%pf::«n§:ien§"' Petitian
E-P.No.2Gl2QG'} petitioner has
ssought (3) of Section 27 of
the Confi-fiiznifieré 1986 as unconstitutéonal
and vqid. _
. E"!' 'h§ve__ heargthe teamed counsef far petitioner.
the second prayer seeking
.cc)nst'1Ei1;ti£zV:}';é1?v':§ia§idi'ty af sub-Section (3) of Section 27 9f
3::_:j1s{3i*ners Pretection Asst, 1986 may be dismissed' as
reserving iiberty to petitioner is quwtion the
u»—–v~–«M———~–w——w.»«._'
: m!fi§°£ {3i)l}£§'{€)!*'fi.ARNfi'l'A_|<_A A1' i3ANGALUR.i:*I W.P._P\ic:x623} OF 2{¥£)§;
E
$32'
§'T'
II
3
Es? T1113 HIGH COURT’ OF KARIJATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.N<:r.623l OF 2068
vaiidity or otherwise of the said ccmstitutienai vaiidity
appropriate stage.
3. Hewever, so far as the first prayer. £9 c_§g2ancé:tned,VL’ ”
learned counsel for first respondéent
said prayer is not maintain’ab.i§ f <.*u'-. 'f§':e
petitioner has not fiIed__ the the
Non Bailable Warant is;Q%ed%A%% b§?A:j£I$e%'%§iJi$tri¢t Consumer
Redrassal 2098 in
by the {earned
4. “5r;_1″view. t:§§,’A’é}j_e-fgubmission mwe by learned
couns§.»’2~apps§’a:*i.§}g”for imih partim as stated supra, the
bjwfxetitioner is disposed of reserving
iAiii’>s,-rt*;r___i:Ti:a” to fiie nae.-msary appiimticm before the
H Vv Sist1’§€§t .C§§n$¥imer Redressai Fczrum, Udupi seeking
\”yéaéai§-qn ‘fir modification cf the crder dated 28″‘ March
E.P_Na.20l2G07 within ten days from tha date of
‘V V :.V¥é§§§eipt of copy of this order. Even other wise aiso, the
L
/
x’
:5
E’? ‘§”!”§!:3 Hiijfl {.T’1_3U!{‘!’Ui” !§Ai%.NA’!’A_l’§.A AT SANGALUKE WJ”No,(a23i BF 2303
4
IN T§Z3f.l§IG1lC€}URT OF KARNATAKA AT EANGALGRE W.P.N<3.623l OF 2098
said prayer could not have been considered in v'§e:§f9f
non compfiance of the conditional interim
by this Court on 16"' April 2008. H9yvaver.« in :ii'1:fi=;rgst}: *
cf justicte, the writ petition is dispoéed;'_o'§.. as§stat§as;:;kp;a'_j
it is neeciiess to mention
Redraw:-sai Forum shah ¢gnsidgr–£i'i§§–.3'ppiicfi§t'it:m..itm~i3e filed
by petitioner for vacafingxa dated 289"
March 2008 of the_ same
in a<:vc:ordar1{§eT'::."«– i$'*..isajrj- :. ':aeff§r "v–:»§af%brding reascnabie
epportunity to pétifvidnééfiv pmibie.
Sd/-3'
Judge
3Mv+i%§%
'f_!'"1E !'J(5§*!{j(_3l,J!{'§'()i*"KAb§NA'i1*ii<..A AT EANGALURE W.}'.No.623l OF 2068