Haryana

Karnal

CC/241/2019

Pritam Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

Oriental Bank Of Commerce - Opp.Party(s)

08 Mar 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.241 of 2019

                                                          Date of instt. 02.05.2019

                                                          Date of Decision: 08.03.2022

 

Pritam Kaur aged about 65 years wife of Shri Shisha Singh, resident of Purani Nilokher, District Karnal. Aadhar no.6470 4870 4250.

 

                                                                        …….Complainant

                                        Versus

 

1.     Oriental Bank of Commerce, Branch Nilokheri, Tehsil Nilokheri, District Karnal, through its Branch Manager.

2.     SBI General Insurance Company Ltd. having its branch office at SCO no.388-389, near Guru Harkirshan School, Mugal Canal Karnal, through its Branch Manager.

3.     The Director of Agriculture Department, Old G.T.Road, opposite old court campus, Karnal.

                                                                        …..Opposite parties.

 

Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before      Sh. Jaswant Singh………President. 

                Sh. Vineet Kaushik……… Member

               

Present:  None for complainant.

                Shri Suresh Kumar, counsel for OP no.1.

                Shri Naveen Khetarpal, counsel for OP no.2.

Shri Surinder Kumar, Project Officer, on behalf of OP no.3

 

                Today the case was fixed for evidence of complainant subject to the last opportunity. Neither none has appeared on behalf of complainant nor any evidence on behalf of complainant has been produced. A careful perusal of the file reveals that from March, 2020 till today, complainant has failed to conclude his evidence after availing several opportunities including three last opportunities.  Case called several times since morning. It is already 4.10 p.m but none has appeared on behalf of complainant. Position remained the same for the last two dates. It appears that complainant is no more interesting in pursuing his case. There is no justification to adjourn the case further as present complaint pertains to the year 2019.

        Hence, in view of the above discussion, the present complaint is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution. However, complainant is at liberty to file fresh complaint on the same cause of action in the court of competent jurisdiction, if so desired. Parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and file be consigned to the record room.

Announced
Dated: 08.03.2022

                                                                                           President, 

District Consumer Disputes

 Redressal Commission, Karnal.

    (Vineet Kaushik)      

        Member