BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PRESENT
SRI. P.V. JAYARAJAN : PRESIDENT
SMT. PREETHA G. NAIR : MEMBER
SRI. VIJU V.R. : MEMBER
C.C.No.148/2020 Filed on 07/08/2020
ORDER DATED: 13/09/2024
Complainant | : | Sidharth.B.Sabu, S/o.Sabu.B, TC 36/1893-13, Kanmani, Puthenpalam Road, Vallakkadavu, Thiruvananthapuram – 695 008. (By Adv.Vishnu.S) |
Opposite parties | : | - Apple India Pvt. Ltd., 19th floor, Concorde Tower C, UB City No.24, VittalMallya Road, Bangalore – 560 001. Rep. by Managing Director.
- Croma, L&T Nexus Mall, Seawoods-A-141, Nexus Mall, Seawoods Grand Central, Mumbai – 400 706.
- F1 Info Solutions & Services Pvt.Ltd., TC 11/637/-11, Lower Bains Compound, Below Helmet world, Museum Nathencode Road, Kowdiar.P.O., Thiruvananthapuram – 695 003.
(By Adv.Ajeesh Mohan) |
ORDER
SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN: PRESIDENT
This is a complaint filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 and the matter stood over to this date for consideration.After hearing the matter the commission passed an order as follows:
This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the opposite parties alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. After admitting the complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. After accepting the notice 1st opposite party entered appearance and filed written version denying the allegation raised by the complainant. As the 2nd and & 3rd opposite parties failed to appear before this Commission after accepting the notice, 2nd opposite party called absent and set ex parte on 15/07/2022 and 3rd opposite party was called absent and set ex parte on 27/07/2023. Since 09/10/2023 this case is adjourned for filling proof affidavit of the complainant. Since 27/07/2023 the complainant is continuously absent and there was no representation. Inspite of giving sufficient opportunities, the complainant failed to file proof affidavit or marking documents to substantiate the case came put forward by the complainant against the opposite parties. As such there is no piece of evidence against the opposite parties to prove the case of the complainant against the opposite parties. In the above circumstances, we find that the complainant has miserably failed to prove his case against the opposite parties. In view of the above discussion we find that this is a fit case to be dismissed for want of evidence.
In the result the complaint is dismissed. There will be no order as to cost.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Court, this the 13th day of September, 2024.
Sd/- P.V. JAYARAJAN | : | PRESIDENT |
Sd/- PREETHA G. NAIR | : | MEMBER |
Sd/- VIJU V.R. | : | MEMBER |
