STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

                                                  R.P.  No. 4 of 2018

                                                   Against

                                           C.C. No. 278 of 2017

                                     District Forum, Ranga Reddy

Between :

Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd

R/o 8^th  Floor, Brigade Gateway, 26/1,

Raj Kumar Road, Malleshwaram (W),

Bangaluru,

Karnataka – 560 05                            ..        Rev. Petitioner/OP.2

and

1. Kalavala Sowmya,

r/o H.no. 2-2-103/1, Road No. 1/C,

Adarsh Nagar colony, Nagole,

Hyderabad – 500 068           .1^st Respondent/complainant

2. M/s. Lenovo (India) Pvt. Ltd

Ferns Icon. Level-2, Doddenakund Village

Marathhalli Outer Ring Road, Marathhalli post,

K.R.Puram, Hobli,

 Bangalore  -560 037           …       2^nd Respondent/1^st opposite party

3. M/s.Cloudtail India Pvt. Ltd

Anjaneya Infrastructure Project No. 38 and 39

Soukya road, Kacherakanahalli,

Hoskote Taluka,

Bangalore  Rural District – 560 067..     3^rd respondent/2^nd OP.

4. Sathyam Electronics

Door No. 2-41/2, Chaitanya Chambers,

Chaitanyapuri, Dilsukhnagar

Hyderabad                                               ..4^th respondent/4^th OP

Counsel for the Revision Petitioner    :         M/s. DSVG Nagaraju

Counsel for the respondents              :         R1- served

                                                                      R2 to R4 are proforma parties 

         Coram                    :

                           Hon’ble Sri Justice M.S.K.Jaiswal ….. President

                              Friday, the Fourteenth  Day of September

                                        Two Thousand Eighteen

ORAL ORDER

                                                            *****

1. This is a Revision Petition  filed by the  2^nd opposite party in CC 278  of 2017 to set aside the impugned  order dated 18.01.2018 passed by the  District Forum, Ranga Reddy questioning that the District Forum without serving notice and without affording an opportunity to make submissions set it exparte in CC. It, further, questioned the action of the respondents/complainants in impleading wrong persons as the opposite parties and trying to obtain orders.
2. The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner  submits that the necessary party to the CC is Amazon Seller Services Private Limited but the respondent/complainant impleaded Amazon Development Center Private Limited as a  party and trying to obtain orders behind back of the petitioner.
3. It is noticed that  the Revision Petitioner has not filed any application in the District Forum to implead it  as necessary and property party.  It is for the Revision Petitioner to approach the District Forum and apply for being impleaded and if not satisfied  with the order passed by the District Forum, then it can file the Revision before this Commission, but, without following due procedure,   straight away it  cannot be filed before this Commission. Hence, the Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. In the result, the Revision Petition is dismissed giving an opportunity to the Revision Petitioner to approach the District Forum and apply for appropriate relief, which, the District Forum shall adjudicate on merits in accordance with law.

                                                                                PRESIDENT                                                                                                     DATED :- 14.09.2018