KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

REVISION PETITION No.67/2022

ORDER DATED: 25.10.2024

(Against the Order in I.A.No.381/2022 in C.C.No.34/2020 of DCDRC, Palakkad)

PRESENT:

REVISION PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT:

(by Advs. Pramod Kumar G.S. & Priya Pillai)

Vs.

RESPONDENTS/OPPOSITE PARTIES:

(by Authorised Representative, Sandeep R.P.)

O R D E R

HON’BLE JUSTICE B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR : PRESIDENT

          This revision petition has been filed by the complainant challenging the order passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Palakkad (the ‘District Commission’ for short) in I.A.No.381/2022 in C.C.No.34/2020 whereby the request made by the revision petitioner for cross-examination of three persons, namely, the Postmaster of Olavakkode Head Post Office, the Branch Manager of Canara Bank and the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, was declined by the District Commission.

Heard.

The learned counsel for the revision petitioner has submitted that the purpose of cross-examination is to find out as to which among the respondents was at fault, which led to the cause of action for filing the present complaint.  However, it appears from the order impugned itself that the 3^rd opposite party had already admitted that it was a mistake on the part of the 3^rd opposite party.  The authorised representative of the 1^st respondent has also submitted that the mistake was on the part of the 3^rd opposite party.  Since the mistake was admitted to have been committed by the 3^rd opposite party, the purpose for cross-examination was already accomplished and hence, there is no need to cross-examine any of the persons mentioned above. For the said reason, the District Commission was perfectly justified in dismissing I.A.No.381/2022.

Having gone through the relevant inputs, we find no reason to interfere with the order impugned.   Accordingly, this revision petition stands dismissed. 

SL