Kerala

Thiruvananthapuram

CC/435/2022

Jijo antony - Complainant(s)

Versus

Realme - Opp.Party(s)

24 Aug 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

                    SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN     : PRESIDENT

                   SMT.PREETHA G NAIR     : MEMBER

                SRI.VIJU.V.R                  : MEMBER

CC.NO.435/22 (Filed on : 17/11/2022)

ORDER DATED : 24/08/2023

COMPLAINANT

Jijo Antony,

OVRA B-58/3

Voltan Lane, Lenin Nagar,

Thycaud.P.O,

Thiruvananthapuram – 695 014

(Party in person)

                                                                   VS

OPPOSITE PARTY

The Manager,

Realme Service Centre,

Grace, TC No.25/3835, Kanaka Nagar,

Kowdiar.P.O. Vellayambalam,

Thiruvananthapuram – 695003

(Exparte)

ORDER

SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN                  : PRESIDENT

1. This complaint is filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 and stood over to this date for consideration and this Commission passed the following order.

2.  This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the opposite party alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. After admitting the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party. After accepting the notice on 05/12/2022, the opposite party failed to appear before this commission and hence on 20/01/2023 the opposite party was called absent and set exparte. Since then this case was posted for affidavit of the complainant. As the complainant was continuously absent, a notice was issued by this commission to the complainant to appear before this commission today to further proceed with this complaint. When the case came up for consideration today, it is noticed that the notice issued to the complainant was served and even after accepting the notice, the complainant failed to appear before this commission. In the above circumstances, we find that the complainant is not interested to further proceed with this complaint. As the complainant failed to file affidavit or mark documents to substantiate his case against the opposite party, we find that the complainant has miserably failed to establish his case against the opposite party. In view of the above discussions, we find that this is a fit case to be dismissed for want of evidence.

                     In the result, the complaint is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.

           A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission, this the 24^th day of August 2023.

 

 

                                                                                                 Sd/-

P.V.JAYARAJAN    : PRESIDENT

                                                                                      Sd/-

        PREETHA G NAIR      : MEMBER

                                                                                        Sd/-

                          VIJU.V.R        : MEMBER

 

 

 

 

be/