NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/361/2021

SRI THIRUMALLESH - Complainant(s)

Versus

MARUTHI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

SHIVANNA MR. BHARADWAJ S. IYENGAR & MR. SUDHANSHU PRAKASH

28 Aug 2023

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 361 OF 2021
(Against the Order dated 11/02/2021 in Appeal No. 751/2019 of the State Commission Karnataka)
1. SRI THIRUMALLESH
SHRI THIRUMALLESH S/O LATE M. SHIVANNA RESIDING AT 701, NEW NO.4,IV CROSS, NEAR MAIN CHANNEL ROAD, SARASWATHIPURAM, BENGALURU
BENGALURU RURAL
KARNATAKA
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. MARUTHI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.
MARUTHI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. HEAD OFFICE AT 1, NEISON MANDELA ROAD, VASANTKUNJ, NEW DELHI
NEW DELHI
DELHI
2. MARUTHI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,
ZONAL OFFICE AT OPPOSITE UB CITY, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA - 560001.
3. KATARIA AUTHOMOBILES PVT. LTD.,
5, 15 CROSS, KOLANDAPPA GARDEN, ANEPALYA, ADUGODI POST, BANGLORE - 5600030, KARNATAKA.
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE,PRESIDING MEMBER

FOR THE PETITIONER :
MR. BHARADWAJ S. IYENGAR, ADVOCATE
FOR THE RESPONDENT :
FOR THE RESPONDENTS NO. 1 & 2 : MR. RISHI RAJ, ADVOCATE
FOR THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 : MR. CHINMOY CHAITANYA, ADVOCATE

Dated : 28 August 2023
ORDER

1.       This revision petition has been filed under Section 58 (1) (b) of the Act 2019 in challenge to the Order dated 11.02.2021 in Appeal No. 751 of 2019 of the State Commission Karnataka arising out of Order dated 26.02.2019 of the District Commission in Complaint no. 1973 of 2017.

2.       It has been made to appear by counsel for both the sides that the Order under challenge here in this petition has already been executed and it has also been made to appear that during the course of the pendency of this petition the original complaint was dismissed on 18.02.2022 and the State Commission vide Order dated 28.10.2022 remanded the case back to the District Commission which is now pending.  Submission is that for all practical purposes the present petition has been rendered infructuous in such conspicuous circumstances. 

3.       The only submission which has been pressed forth by the petitioner’s counsel is that petitioner must be allowed to reserve its right to assail the validity of the expert report which has already been furnished by the expert in compliance of the Order which has been impugned in the present petition.

4.       In the wake of the submissions made the petition stands dismissed as infructuous.  It may be observed that so far as the correctness or otherwise of the expert report is concerned the petitioner shall have a right to argue and contest upon the merits and acceptability of the same. 

5.       Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

 

6.       The Registry is requested to send a copy each of this Order to all parties in the petition and to their learned counsel. The stenographer is requested to upload this Order on the website of this Commission immediately.  

 
..................................................J
KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE
PRESIDING MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.