KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
APPEAL No.371/2023
JUDGEMENT DATED: 18.06.2024
(Against the Order in C.C.No.59/2021 of DCDRC, Alappuzha)
PRESENT:
SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. | : | JUDICIAL MEMBER |
SRI. K.R. RADHAKRISHNAN | : | MEMBER |
APPELLANT:
| Muhammad Riyad, S/o Abdul Wahab, Puthenpurackal Veedu, Zachariah Ward, Alappuzha – 688 012 |
(Party in person)
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
| Advocate Ajith, S/o Rajasekharan, Unnikkad, Varanadu P.O., Cherthala |
(by AdvS. V.M. Arunkumar & Narayan R.)
JUDGEMENT
SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER
Appellant is absent. Respondent enters appearance through Advocate Narayan R. This appeal arose against the order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Alappuzha (the District Commission for short) in C.C.No.59/2021.
2. The case arose in respect of deficiency in service with respect to the lawyers who appeared on behalf of the complainant. The complaint was dismissed by the District Commission. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, this appeal has been filed.
3. In view of the recent ruling of the Apex Court reported in
2024 (3) KLT 380 Bar of Indian Lawyers through its President Jasbir Singh Malik Vs. D.K. Gandhi P.S. National Institute of Communicable Diseases it is declared in categorical terms that no consumer complaint will lie against a lawyer alleging deficiency in service. So the cause of action alleged in this appeal ceases to exist.
In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Parties shall bear their respective costs.
AJITH KUMAR D. | : | JUDICIAL MEMBER |
K.R. RADHAKRISHNAN | : | MEMBER |
SL
