Court : Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Jaipur
Decided on : Oct-17-2011
..... in his name but they failed to do so. 3. the appellants have challanged the judgment of the learned district forum on the ground that there was no privity of contract between the appellants and the respondent. they have submitted that respondent has not submitted any succession certificate. they have also argued that this dispute is between the transport authority, sriganganagar ..... in auction sale cannot raise any dispute later on concerning this auction. the learned counsel has also argued that this dispute does not come within the preview of c.p. act, 1986. he has cited ii (2009) cpj 1 (sc)=ii (2009) slt 736, u.t. chandigarh administration v. amarjeet singh. in this matter purchaser refused to deposit the amount for .....Tag this Judgment!