STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION OF TELANGANA `

AT HYDERABAD

                                                  R.P.  No. 37 of 2017

                                                   Against

                                           C.C. No. 145 of 017

                                     District Forum, Ranga Reddy

Between :

Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd

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

Raj Kumar Road, Bengaluru,

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

and

1. M.  Suresh, S/o Dasharatha,

R/o 10-4-D/76, Addagutta,

East Marredpally,

Secunderabad…        .Respondent No.1/1^st complainant

2. V. Rajender,

R/o Plot No. B-16, Industrial Area,

Moula Ali,

Hyderabad – 500 040.  .. 2^nd Respondent/2^nd complainant

3. E-Mobiles

represented through its Manager/Person-in-charge

Anjaneya infrastructure Project No. 38 and 39

Soukya road, Kacherakanahalli,

Hoskote Taluka, Bangalore Rural District

Karnataka State                  .. Respondent No.3/OP.2

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

Counsel for the respondents              :         R1- served

                                                                      R2- deemed served

                                                                      R3- proforma party.

         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 145 of 2017 to set aside the impugned  order dated 29.08.2017 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 in place of it and if not satisfied  with the order that was 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