STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW.
REVISION NO.85 OF 2016
(Against the judgment/order dated 06.05.2016 in Complaint Case No.110/2013 of the District Consumer Forum, Azamgarh.)
Manoj Kumar,
S/o Ram Tegh Ram
Sakin, Bhagwanpur,
Post- Sahiyav,
Thana Mubarakpur,
District Azamgarh.
...............Revisionist
Vs
Kedar Agarwal,
Customer Assistance Centre (All India),
Tata Motors Ltd., 20th Floor, 2A 1,
India Bulls Centre, 84, Sainapati Bapat Road,
Alfinston Road, Mumbai-400013.
Maharashtra.
...............Opposite Party
BEFORE:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT
HON’BLE SMT. BAL KUMARI, MEMBER
HON’BLE MR. VIJAI VARMA, MEMBER
For the Revisionist : Sri Paras Nath Tiwari, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party : None present.
Dated: 14.10.2016
JUDGMENT
MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN (ORAL)
Heard learned Counsel for revisionist and perused impugned order dated 16.05.2016 passed by District Consumer Forum in complaint Case No.110/13 Manoj Kumar Vs Kedar Agarwal whereby District Consumer Forum, Azamgarh has rejected application moved by revisionist for amendment in complaint.
We have heard learned Counsel for revisionist and perused impugned order.
Vide impugned order the District Consumer Forum has rejected amendment application moved by revisionist on the ground of technical defect. Revisionist is at liberty to move fresh application before District Consumer Forum after removing defect.
In view of above revision is disposed of finally with liberty to revisionist to move fresh amendment application before District Consumer Forum after removing defects pointed out by District Consumer Forum in impugned order.
(JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN)
PRESIDENT
(SMT. BAL KUMARI)
MEMBER
(VIJAI VARMA)
MEMBER
Sarika
