Andhra Pradesh

StateCommission

FA/637/2010

B.LAKSHMI, D/O.B.NARASIMHULU - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S RADHA RELATORS PVT.LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

INDUS LAW FIRM

09 Jul 2010

ORDER

 
First Appeal No. FA/637/2010
(Arisen out of Order Dated 12/04/2010 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/111/2010 of District Hyderabad-III)
 
1. B.LAKSHMI, D/O.B.NARASIMHULU
R/O.PENT HOUSE, SANTHI APARTMENTS, BHAGYANAGAR COLONY, KADAPA.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. M/S RADHA RELATORS PVT.LTD.
8-2-293/82/A/824, ROAD NO.4, JUBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD-033
2. SRI N.RAVINDRA REDDY MANAGING DIRECTOR
M/S RADHA REALTORS PVT LTD.8-2-293/82/A/824 ROAD NO.4, JUBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD.
3. L.NAGESHWAR REDDY S/O.L.ESWAR REDDY
GREEN COURT APARTMENT, NIZAMPET ROAD, OPP.KOLAN RAGHAVA ROAD, HYDERABAD
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

 

 

 

BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: AT HYDERABAD.

 

FA.No.637/2010 against CC.No.111/2010 District Consumer Forum-III, Hyderabad.

Between:

B.Lakshmi, D/o.B.Narasimhulu,

Aged about 40 years,

Occ: Household,

R/o.Pent House, Santhi Apartments,

Bhagyanagar Colony,

Kadapa.

…Appellant/Complainant.

And

1.M/s.Radha Realtors Pvt.Ltd.

   8-2-293/82/a/824,

   Road No.4, Jubilee Hills,

  

2.Sri N.Ravindra Reddy,

   Managing Director,

   M/s.Radha Realtors Pvt.Ltd.

   8-2-293/82/a/824,

   Road No.4, Jubilee Hills,

  

3.L.Nageshwar Reddy,

   S/o.L.Eswar Reddy,

   Aged about 40 years, R/o.Flat No.102,

   Green Court Apartment,

   Nizampet Road, Opp.Kolan Raghava Reddy Function Hall,

  

…Respondents/Opp.Parties.

 

Counsel for the Appellant         :  M/s.Indus Law Firm.

Counsel for the Respondents   :  Notice stage.

 

QUORUM: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT,

AND

SMT. M.SHREESHA, HON’BLE MEMBER.

 

WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY,

TWO THOUSAND TEN.

 

Oral Order (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice D.Appa Rao, President)

*******

1.         This is an appeal preferred by the complainant against the order of dismissal of her complaint on the ground that she did not appear on the date on which the matter was posted for filing her affidavit evidence. 

2.         Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant preferred this appeal contending that she is a resident of Kadapa and therefore, could not come in time and file her affidavit evidence. 

Heard both sides.

3.         Since the District Forum has no jurisdiction to set aside the exparte order, the complainant preferred this appeal.  As the complaint was dismissed solely for non-filing of affidavit evidence, we are of the opinion that one more chance could be given to the complainant,  however, in view of latches on payment of costs of Rs.500/-.  Costs paid.

4.         In the result, the appeal is allowed and the order of the District Forum is set aside.  The District Forum is directed to restore the complaint   its original file.  The District Forum is directed to receive the affidavit evidence of the complainant and proceed with the matter after giving opportunity to both parties.  Both parties are directed to appear before the District Forum on 10.08.2010 without insisting fresh notice.

PRESIDENT

 

MEMBER

DtVvr.

 

 

 

 

 

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.