Haryana

Karnal

CC/610/2021

Yashvardhan Partap Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Kalpana Clinical Laboratory - Opp.Party(s)

Akshat Sharma

30 Nov 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

                                                          Complaint.No.610 of 2021

                                                          Date of instt.28.10.2021

                                                          Date of Decision:30.11.2023

 

Yashvardhan Partap Singh (Minor) son of Sh. Ajit Singh, resident of house no.E-49 Mugal Mohalla, Subhas Gate Karnal, through his father Ajit Singh.

          ...…Complainant

                                        Versus

1. Kaplana Clinical Laboratory opposite Kalpana Chawla Govt. Medical College Karnal, through its proprietor.
2. Dr. Om Parkash Midha Consultant Pathologist care of Kalpana Clinical Laboratory opposite Kaplana Chawala Govt. Medical College Karnal.
3. Jagdamba Baby Care Centre 1955-56, Sector-13 (13-14 Dividing road) Karnla, through its Prop. Dr. Manoj Mittal.

 

                        ....Opposite parties.

                                             

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Before    Sh. Jaswant Singh………President. 

                Sh. Vineet Kaushik……… Member.

                Dr. Suman Singh………….Member.

               

Present:   None for the complainant.

                Shri Ansul Chaudhary, counsel for the OP-1.

                Shri Sanjeev Kamboj, counsel for the OP-3.

                 

                Today the case is fixed for notice to the OP-2. Notice could not be issued for want of correct address. No one has put into appearance on behalf of the complainant. Case called several times since morning but none has put into appearance on behalf of the complainant. It is already 03:30 PM. The complaint pertains to the year 2021 and since is initial stage i.e. notice to the OP-2. Complainant has already availed twelve opportunities to file the correct address of the OP-2, but he has failed to file the address of the OP-2. It appears that complainant is no more interested to pursue his case. There is no justification to adjourn the case further for the same purpose.

                Hence, in view the above facts, the present complaint is hereby dismissed. However, complainant is at liberty to file fresh complaint on the same cause of action in the court of competent jurisdiction, if so desired. Parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and file be consigned to the record room.

Dated:30.11.2023             

                        President,

District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, Karnal.

(Vineet Kaushik)   (Dr. Suman Singh) 

  Member                    Member