Kerala

Thiruvananthapuram

CC/195/2022

BABU M JACOB - Complainant(s)

Versus

MALL OF TRAVANCORE - Opp.Party(s)

29 Apr 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

              SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN     : PRESIDENT

              SMT.PREETHA G NAIR     : MEMBER

             SRI.VIJU.V.R                     : MEMBER

CC.NO.195/2022 (Filed on : 21/05/2022)

ORDER DATED : 29/04/2023

COMPLAINANT

Babu.M.Jacob,

Manna parambil House,

Vendu vazhi, Karukadam Post,

Kothamangalam – 686691

(Party in person)

                                                          VS

OPPOSITE PARTY

Mall of Travancore,

International Near Airport,

Enchakkal, Thiruvananthapuram – 695024

 (By Adv.A.Abdul Kharim)

ORDER

SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN                  : PRESIDENT

1. This complaint is filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 and stood over to this date for consideration and this Commission passed the following order.

2.       This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the opposite party alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. After admitting the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party. The opposite party entered appearance and filed written version denying the allegations raised by the complainant.

3.       The case of the complainant is in respect of collecting parking fee by the opposite party from the customers. According to the complainant Rs.15/- (Rupees fifteen only) was levied from the complainant by the opposite party and hence alleging unfair trade practice the complainant approached this commission for redressing his grievances.

4.   The opposite party contended that there is no rule for the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules 1999 or in the Kerala Municipality Building Rules 1999 providing for free parking in the building as alleged by the complainant. Hence according to the opposite party has got a right to collect parking fee for the proper maintenance and security of the premise and hence there is no unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

5. The case now stands posted to 05/06/2023 for marking documents of the opposite party. Meanwhile today the complainant filed a memo stating that in view of the recent High Court Judgment regarding the collection of parking fee in favour of the premises owners, the complainant is not willing to further proceed with this complaint. To consider this memo the case was suo moto advanced to this day. The memo filed by the complainant is accepted and recorded. In the above circumstances, we find that this is a fit case to be dismissed as not pressed.

                   In the result, the complaint is dismissed as not pressed. There will be no order as to costs.

                  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 Commission, this the 29^th April 2023.

 

                                                                             Sd/-

P.V.JAYARAJAN    : PRESIDENT

                                                                                      Sd/-

        PREETHA G NAIR      : MEMBER

                                                                                        Sd/-

                          VIJU.V.R        : MEMBER

 

 

Be/