Orissa

Kalahandi

CC/7/2016

Mirja Anwar Beg - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ashok Dhawana - Opp.Party(s)

16 Nov 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KALAHANDI
NEAR TV CENTRE PADA, BHAWANIPATANA, KALAHANDI
ODISHA, PIN 766001
 
Complaint Case No. CC/7/2016
( Date of Filing : 19 Jan 2016 )
 
1. Mirja Anwar Beg
S/O Jabbar Beg Perdesipada Bhawanipatana
Kalahandi
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Ashok Dhawana
C/O Priya Polymber Mangar Para MG road raipur
Raipur
Chhatishgarh
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Aswini Kumar Patra PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Sudhakar Senapothi MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 16 Nov 2022
Final Order / Judgement

CC.07 of 2016 (original C.D NO.54 of 1998)

Order dt.16.11.2022

Parties are absent on call. No steps taken by the complainant. On perusal of the case record it is found that an appeal vide C.D appeal No.511 of 2002 was filed before the Hon’ble SCDRC,Odisha,Cuttack against the order dt. 28.05.2002 passed by Hon’ble DCDRF,Kalahandi in C.D Case No.54 of 1998 . Said appeal was disposed of vide order dt.27.07.2015 and remanded back to the Hon’ble DCDRF,Kalahandi for hearing a fresh. The Hon’ble SCDRC, further directed the Hon’ble DCDRF,Kalahandi to issue notice to the parties for their appearance and hear the C.D case a fresh and to pass order in accordance with law.

On dt.18.01.2016 the original C.D case record vide No.54 of 1998 along with copy of the order dt.27.07.2015 passed in the aforesaid appeal No.511 of 2002 is received from the Hon’ble State Commission and newly registered as CC Case No.07 of 2016. Issued notice to the parties vide Notice No.78 dt.22.02.2018 through Regd. Post for their appearance & fresh hearing by fixing the date 26.02.2016 . However, notice could not be served to the opponent accordingly the complainant is directed to take steps for alternative mode of service i.e. by paper publication. It reversals from the record that, as many as 44 adjournment has been granted directing the complainant for paper publication to procure the attendance of the opposite party. The complainant present before the DCDRF in this case time& again and well aware of the aforesaid order for paper publication. Recently on 28.03.2022 the complainant physically present and submitted his memo of hazira available on the record shows his awareness of the previous order passed in this case but no steps has been taken  for paper publication to procure the attendance of the opposite party to take part in the hearing of this case which clearly proved that the complainant is not interest to proceed any more in this case rather this Commission has been wasting time and energy meant for  proper adjudication of the  consumer complaints by posting of the case on regular basis.

 In view of the above facts and circumstances this consumer complaint is dismissed for non prosecution. However, there is no order as to cost. The complaint is disposed of accordingly.

Free copy of this order be supply to the respective parties or they may download the same from the Confonet to treat the same as copy of the order receipt from this Commission.

     

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Aswini Kumar Patra]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sudhakar Senapothi]
MEMBER
 

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.