IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  COMMISSION, KOLLAM

Dated this the  23^rd    Day of  January   2023

  Present: -  Smt.S.Sandhya Rani, Bsc, L.L.B,President(I/C)

                   Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member

                                                CC.56/2021

Philip Mathew                                                 :       Complainant

Marangattu House

Kundara, Kollam-691501.

[By Adv.P.Sajeev Babu]

V/s

1. Popular Dealers&Popular Traders      :         Opposite parties

          Regd.Office Popular Towers

         Vakayar, Pathanamthitta.

        (Incorporated under the Companies Act 2013)

         Represented by its Managing Partner

        Thomas Daniel.

2. Y.Mathew Panicker

          Former Branch Manager

         of Popular Dealers & Popular Traders

         Kundara,Residing at,

         Maliyekkal Mathew Bhavan,

         Punnamukku, Perumpuzha P.O.-691504.

3. T.Mathunni Panicker

         Branch Manager

        Popular Dealers & Popular Traders

        Kundara

       Residing at Plavila Thekkathil

       Raju Nivas, Ambipoika.-691501.

FINAL    ORDER

S.SANDHYA RANI, B Sc, LLB, PRESIDENT(I/C)

This is a case based on a complaint filed by the complainant, Philip Mathew, Marangattu House, Kundara, Kollam against Thomas Daniel represented by Popular Dealers and Popular Traders, its Managing Partner, Branch Managers etc praying to return Rs.4,35,000/- with interest @12%  per annum along with compensation and costs of the proceedings.  The opposite parties 1 to 3 remained exparte, thereupon the case was posted for recording exparte evidence.  Though sufficient opportunity was granted, the complainant failed to adduce any exparte evidence.  But on 19.01.2023 when the case was taken up for recoding exparte evidence the learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that he has no instruction from the complainant.

In the circumstances it is clear that the complainant is not intending to file any proof affidavit.  The documents produced along with the complaint are only unattested photocopy of fixed deposit receipts which is not admissible in evidence in view of Section 114 1(i) of the Indian Evidence Act.  Hence it is not marked in evidence.  That there is absolutely no evidence to corroborate the averments in the complaint.  Hence the complaint is only to be dismissed.

In the circumstances we are of the view that there is absolutely no evidence.

In the result complaint stands dismissed.

         No costs.

Dated this the    23^rd    day of   January   2023.

                                                                                     S.Sandhya Rani:Sd/-

                                                                                     Stanly Harold:Sd/-

             Forwarded/by Order

              Senior Superintendent