Kerala

Alappuzha

CC/285/2004

Narayanan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Adv.P.Sethumohanan Pillai - Opp.Party(s)

29 Oct 2008

ORDER


Consumer Disputes Redressal ForumNear Pazhaveedu Village Office,Pazhaveedu P.O ,Alappuzha 688009
Complaint Case No. CC/285/2004
1. Narayanan Nediyath South,Thamarakulam P.O,Alappuzha 2. SaradhaW/O Narayanan,Nediyath South,Thamarakulam P.OAlappuzhaKerala ...........Appellant(s)

Versus.
1. Adv.P.Sethumohanan Pillai Mabhayil Building,Mavelikara, Court P.O 2. S.ValsalaKalpattaKalpattaKerala3. Adv.K.T NanuMabhayil Building,Mavelikara, Court P.OAlappuzhaKerala4. S.SobhanaAhemedabad,GujaratAhemedabad,Gujarat5. S.Vasantha KumaryThamarakulamKerala ...........Respondent(s)



BEFORE:

PRESENT :

Dated : 29 Oct 2008
JUDGEMENT

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

SRI. JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT)

Filed on 16.12.2004

 

            The case advanced by the complainants is that the opposite parties were their advocates in O.S. No.35/96 before the Sub Court, Mavelikara.   Though the complainants paid fees, but the opposite parties have not submitted the case as they requested for and there is negligence on their part in filing and conducting the case.  Hence there is deficiency in services and claim for Rs.4 lakhs as compensation.

            2.  The  opposite parties contended that there is no negligence on their part at all as alleged.  The allegations regarding fetching of money also false.    They stated that there is no deficiency in service on their part.   Hence they request to  dismiss  the complaint.

           

            3.  On the side of the complainants, PW1 was examined and   Exts. A1 to A19 marked.  On  the side of the opposite parties  RW1 was examined. 

4.  Though so many documents produced by the complainants, there is no valid document  produced to show the negligence or acceptance of  exorbitant money by the opposite parties.   Hence there is nothing in evidence to show there is deficiency  in services on  the part of the opposite parties.  The complainant has no merit and it is to harass the opposite parties unnecessarily.  Moreover the judgment of Sub Court at Mavelikara is a considered order.   

In the result, the complaint is dismissed.     No order as to costs. 

            Dictated to the Confidential Asst. transcribed by her corrected to me  and pronounced in open Forum on this the 29th day of  October, 2008.

                                                                                                Sd/- Sri. Jimmy Korah:

                                                                                                Sd/- Sri. K. Anirudhan:

                                                                                               Sd/- Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi :    

 

Appendix:-

Evidence of the complainant:-

 

PW1                -                       Narayanan (Witness)

Ext.A1             -                       Copy of the judgment in OS 35/06 

Ext.A2             -                       Copy of ‘B’ Diary

Ext.A3             -                       Copy of the Order of High Court in OP No.176/1998      

Ext.A4             -                       Copy of Resurvey plan           

Ext.A5             -                       Post Cards of Advocates    

Ext.A6             -                       Notice of Tahsildar, Mavelikara dated 20.1.1996

Ext.A7             -                       Notice of Taluk Surveyor, Mavelikara dated 1.7.1996

Ext.A8             -                       Notice of Dt. Collector, Alappuzha dated 17.9.1996

Ext.A9             -                       Complaint dated 21.1.1997

Ext.A10           -                       Letter dated 15.3.1997 of 2nd opposite party

Ext.A11           -                       Notice of Dt. Collector dated 24.12.1997

Ext.A12           -                       Copy of the complaint dated 17.1.1999 before the Nooranadu

                                                Police Inspector

Ext.A13           -                       Copy of the complaint dated 19.1.1999 before the Chengannur

                                                DYSP.

Ext.A14           -                       Copy of complaint dated 1.3.1999 before the Telecom Officer,

                                                Kattanam

Ext.A15           -                       Copy of  the complaint dated 4.4.1999 before the Dt. Collector

Ext.A16           -                       Copy of the complaint dated 30.6.2001 before the Nooranadu

                                                Police Inspector

Ext.A17           -                       Copy of the complaint dated 1.10.2003 before the Chengannur

                                                Revenue Divisional Officer

Ext.A18           -                       Tax Receipts of Village Office, Thamarakkulam dated 16.6.2000

                                                & 21.4.2003

Ext.A19           -                       Tax receipt dated 10.8.1962, Notice of Tahsildar dated 18.12.1993

                                                (LA 8/89)    

 

Evidence of the opposite parties:-

 

RW1                -                       P.Sethumohanan Pillai (Witness)

 

// True Copy//

 

                                                                                                                               By Order

 

 

                                                                                                                        Senior Superintendent

To

            Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.

 

 

 

 

Typed by:-pr/-

 

Compared by:-