Kerala

StateCommission

RA/11/2023

THE MANAGER,MUTHOOT FINCORP - Complainant(s)

Versus

MUHAMMED - Opp.Party(s)

05 Jun 2023

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
 
Review Application No. RA/11/2023
( Date of Filing : 19 May 2023 )
In
First Appeal No. A/594/2017
 
1. THE MANAGER,MUTHOOT FINCORP
PAPPACHAN GROUP, SREE LAKSHMI TOWER, POOKOTTUM PADAM, MALAPPURAM- 679332
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. MUHAMMED
MARUTHATH HOUSE, PARAL, MAMBATTUMOOLA.P.O, CHOKKAD, MALAPPURAM- 679332
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SRI.K.SURENDRA MOHAN PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. SRI.AJITH KUMAR.D JUDICIAL MEMBER
  SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN.K.R MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 05 Jun 2023
Final Order / Judgement

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

REVIEW APPLICATION No. 11/2023 in APPEAL No. 594/2017

ORDER DATED: 05.06.2023

PRESENT:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. K. SURENDRA MOHAN     : PRESIDENT

SRI. AJITH KUMAR D.                                                    : JUDICIAL MEMBER

SMT. BEENA KUMARY. A                                              : MEMBER

SRI. RADHAKRISHNAN K.R.                                        : MEMBER

REVIEW PETITIONER:

 

The Manager, Muthoot Fincorp, Pappachan Group, Sree Lakshmi Tower, Pookottum Padam, Malappuram-679 332.

 

(By Adv. Jayakrishnan D.)

 

                                                Vs.

RESPONDENT:

 

Muhammed, S/o Alavi, Maruthath House, Paral, Mambattumoola P.O., Chokkad, Malappuram-679 332.

 

 

ORDER

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. K. SURENDRA MOHAN : PRESIDENT

 

The review petitioner who is the appellant in Appeal No. 594/2017 seeks review of an order dated 18.01.2023 passed by this Commission dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution.  According to the review petitioner, due to a clerical error in noting down the posting date there was no representation for the appellant on one day before this Commission.  However, it is stated that the appeal was dismissed for want of representation. 

2.  Heard the counsel for the review petitioner.  A perusal of the order sought to be reviewed shows that there had been no representation for the appellant on various postings from 12.07.2022 onwards.  Noticing the above fact, the appellant was granted one final chance to appear.  Accordingly, the appeal was posted to 05.01.2023 for hearing, finally.  It was in the absence of representation on the said date also that the appeal was dismissed. 

3.  Sec. 50 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 has empowered this Commission to review its orders only if there was an error apparent on the face of the record, thereof.  We find no error apparent on the face of the record in the order which is sought to be reviewed in this case.

In view of the above, this review petition is dismissed.

 

JUSTICE K. SURENDRA MOHAN  : PRESIDENT

 

                              AJITH KUMAR  D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

                                                                                              BEENA KUMARY. A         : MEMBER

 

                                                                                                   RADHAKRISHNAN K.R.  : MEMBER

jb

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SRI.K.SURENDRA MOHAN]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. SRI.AJITH KUMAR.D]
JUDICIAL MEMBER
 
 
[ SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN.K.R]
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.