Kerala

Thiruvananthapuram

CC/19/4

Sudarsanan S - Complainant(s)

Versus

Athira Electronics - Opp.Party(s)

04 Mar 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
SISUVIHAR LANE
VAZHUTHACAUD
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
695010
 
Complaint Case No. CC/19/4
( Date of Filing : 05 Jan 2019 )
 
1. Sudarsanan S
pushpavila veedu.poykamukku,trivandrum
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Athira Electronics
Attingal,Trivandrum
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Sri.P.V.JAYARAJAN PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Preetha .G .Nair MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Viju V.R MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 04 Mar 2024
Final Order / Judgement

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. 04/2019 Filed on 05/01/2019

ORDER DATED: 04/03/2024

 

Complainant

:

Sudarsanan.S, Pushpavila Veedu, Poikamukku.P.O.

Opposite parties

:

  1. Hemalatha, Owner, Athira Electonics, Attingal.
  2. The Director, Dish TV, B.10, Lawrance Road, Industrial Area, New Delhi – 110 035. 

(By Adv.Chandrapraveen)

ORDER

SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN: PRESIDENT

This is a complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 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 complainants 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.  The opposite parties entered appearance and filed written version denying the allegation raised by the complainant.  Subsequently this case is posted for marking documents of the complainant.  Since 27/07/2022 this case is posted for marking documents of the complainant.   Inspite of giving sufficient opportunities, the complainant failed to appear before this commission to mark the documents and to further proceed with this complaint.  The complainant was continuously absent since 09/02/2023.  In the above circumstances there is no piece of evidence from the side of the complainant to prove the allegation raised against the opposite parties.  Hence we find that this is a fit case to be dismissed for want of evidence.           

In the result 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 04th day of March,  2024.

 

Sd/-

P.V. JAYARAJAN

:

PRESIDENT

Sd/-

PREETHA G. NAIR

 

:

 

      MEMBER

Sd/-

VIJU  V.R

:

MEMBER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sri.P.V.JAYARAJAN]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Preetha .G .Nair]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Viju V.R]
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.