BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (ADDL. BENCH)
DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF JUNE 2024
PRESENT
MR. RAVISHANKAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
MRS. SUNITA CHANNABASAPPA BAGEWADI : MEMBER
APPEAL NO. 712/2017
Shri. R.Pothuaraiah Sri.Puthalurachar, S/o Rachapparachar, Aged about 31 year, shop address at Sree Vijayalakshmi Jewellery Works Kumara building No.4, Anekere Street, Mandya. Residing at: #408, 5th cross, Harischandra Circle, Halahalli, Mandya-571401 (By Smt. Jyoti C, Advocate) | ….Appellant/s |
V/s
Chandrachari S/o Mantelingachari Aged about 72 years, Residing at No.451, RMD Layout, Sathagahalli, Nazarbad mohalla, Mysore. (By Sri. Kumar.A.Patil, Advocate) | …Respondent/s |
O R D E R
BY SRI.RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
The Appellants/Opposite party have preferred this appeal against the order dated 29.09.2016 passed in CC.No.853/2015 by the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission at Mandya.
2. The appellant not present since from filing of this appeal, sufficient opportunities are provided inspite of that the appellant as not appeared before this commission. At the same time the respondent present and submits that, respondent have paid an amount of Rs.45,000/- as an advance, towards purchase of gold ornaments worth of Rs.2,98,214/- and also not returning the gold ornaments which were given for polish and cleaning. Due to non return of the gold ornaments, the complainant was not ready for purchase of the new ornaments, the complainant sought for refund of the advance amount and also sought for return of the old gold ornaments but the appellant failed to return the said ornaments, hence filed a complaint before the District Commission alleging deficiency in service and sought for return of the gold ornaments along with refund of the advance amount of Rs.45,000/-. The District Commission after trial allowed the complaint and directed this appellant to refund the entire amount paid, against which this appellant filed appeal, infact the appellant were not appeared before this commission to substantiate their grounds to set aside the order passed by the District Commission. Hence, prays for dismissal of the appeal also.
3. Perused the certified copy of the order and memorandum of appeal, we noticed that the order passed by the District Commission is an exparte order against this appellant, the reason for non appearance before the District Commission is that the notice issued by the District Commission was refused there by this appellant placed exparte. After appreciating the evidence and argument submitted by the respondent, the District Commission had directed this appellant to refund the entire amount. At the same time no valid reasons urged before this Commission to set aside the order passed by the District Commission. Further there is a delay in filling this appeal also, no valid reasons urged to condone the delay.
4. We are of the opinion that, the order passed by the District Commission is in accordance with law, no interference is required. Accordingly,
O R D E R
The appeal is dismissed. No order as to cost.
The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the concerned District Consumer Commission to pay the same to the complainant.
Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as concerned District Consumer Commission.
(Sunita .C. Bagewadi) (Ravishankar)
Member Judicial Member
ARD*
