上海419论坛,上海龙凤419,爱上海 - Powered by Portia Eldi!

Appeal Against NCDRC Order Passed In Execution Proceedings Not Maintainable U/Sec 23 Consumer Protection Act: SC [Read Order]

first_imgTop StoriesAppeal Against NCDRC Order Passed In Execution Proceedings Not Maintainable U/Sec 23 Consumer Protection Act: SC [Read Order] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK1 Sep 2020 7:43 AMShare This – xThe Supreme Court has observed that an appeal before it against an order which has been passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in the course of execution proceedings is not maintainable.M/s Ambience Infrastructure Private Limited was directed by the NCDRC to pay to the complainants 70% of the maintenance charges from November 2002 with interest at 9 % per…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Supreme Court has observed that an appeal before it against an order which has been passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in the course of execution proceedings is not maintainable.M/s Ambience Infrastructure Private Limited was directed by the NCDRC to pay to the complainants 70% of the maintenance charges from November 2002 with interest at 9 % per annum within 90 days or else pay at an enhanced rate of 12 % per annum. This order was passed in the Execution Petition.Referring to Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, the court observed that an appeal under Section 23 is maintainable against an order which has been passed by the NCDRC on a complaint where the value of the goods or services and compensation, if any, claimed, exceeds the threshold which is prescribed.The bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and KM Joseph noted the judgment in Karnataka Housing Board vs K.A. Nagamani (2019) 6 SCC 424, which had made a distinction between execution proceedings and original proceedings and held that the former are separate and independent.  While dismissing the appeal as not maintainable, the bench observed:”In our view, having regard to Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, an appeal will not lie to this court against an order which has been passed in the course of execution proceedings. The appeals are hence dismissed as not being maintainable.”In K.A. Nagamani, it was held that orders passed for enforcement of the final order in the Consumer dispute, cannot be construed to be orders passed in the ‘consumer dispute’.As per the new Consumer Protection Act, 2019, any person, aggrieved by an order made by the National Commission in exercise of its powers conferred by sub-clause (i) or (ii) of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 58, may prefer an appeal against such order to the Supreme Court within a period of thirty days from the date of the order. Sub clause (i) deals with complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration exceeds rupees ten crore and sub clause (ii) deals with complaints against unfair contracts, where the value of goods or services paid as consideration exceeds ten crore rupees.Case DetailsCase name: M/s Ambience Infrastructure Private Limited vs. Ambience Island Apartment OwnersCase no.: Civil Appeal Nos 1213-1215 of 2017Coram: Justices DY Chandrachud and KM JosephCounsel: Sr. Adv Mukul Rohatgi, AOR Kamini Jaiswal Click here to Read/Download OrderRead OrderNext Storylast_img read more

Rapid deglaciation of Marguerite Bay, western Antarctic Peninsula in the Early Holocene

first_imgGlacial geological evidence of rapid ice stream retreat is important for the potential insight it can bring to understanding of contemporary rapid ice sheet change. Here, we report new chronological constraints on the deglacial history of the Marguerite Trough Ice Stream, which formerly drained part of the western margin of the Antarctic Peninsula. This ice stream has been previously identified on geomorphological grounds as an example of an outlet that underwent rapid retreat following the Last Glacial Maximum, but the precise timing of this retreat has not been conclusively determined. We obtained cosmogenic surface exposure dates on erratic boulders that record the thinning history of ice flowing into the ice stream. These dates show that the ice stream underwent >270 m of thinning very rapidly at 9.6 ka BP. The timing of ice stream thinning agrees closely with previously published data on ice shelf retreat, the age of the first post-glacial beaches, and minimum constraining ages for the onset of lacustrine sedimentation, and post-glacial sedimentation in inner shelf fjords. We compare the timing of retreat to the similarly-sized Anvers Trough ice stream further north and find that retreat in Marguerite Bay was more rapid and earlier than in the Anvers Trough. We argue that the intrusion of Circumpolar Deep Water is the most likely forcing mechanism for retreat in Marguerite Bay. A key finding of this study is that rapid retreat occurred in deep water with reverse (continent-dipping) slope but also in relatively shallow water with a positive slope. This may have implications for understanding of oceanographically-forced ice sheet change in other parts of West Antarctica. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.last_img read more