Karnataka

StateCommission

A/1673/2023

RAVIGOWDA H - Complainant(s)

Versus

SARASWATHI ENGINEERING WORKS - Opp.Party(s)

I.P(Ravi Gowda)

27 Feb 2024

ORDER

KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
BASAVA BHAVAN, BANGALORE.
 
First Appeal No. A/1673/2023
( Date of Filing : 07 Sep 2023 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 22/08/2023 in Case No. Execution Application No. EA/29/2021 of District Mandya)
 
1. RAVIGOWDA H
AGE 45 YEARS, PROPRIETOR NRG INDUSTRIES INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, 2ND STAGE, PLOT NO -47A., TUBINAKEGE INDUSTRIAL AREA, KOTTHATHI HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT -571446
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. SARASWATHI ENGINEERING WORKS
SARASWATHI ENGINEERING WORKS REPRESENTED BY ARULSWAMY SR, OPPOSITE NEW CITIZEN KANTHA, IDA SWAPNA THEATER, RAJENDRA NAGAR MANDAL, RR DISTRICT, KATTEDAN 500077 HYDERABAD, TELANGANA.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Huluvadi G. Ramesh PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Krishnamurthy B.Sangannavar JUDICIAL MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Divyashree.M MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 27 Feb 2024
Final Order / Judgement

Dtd.27.02.2024                                            A/1673/2023

O R D E R

       BY Mr.K.B.SANGANNANAVAR : Pri.Dist & Session Judge (R) - JUDICIAL MEMBER.

 

  1.    This is an appeal filed U/s.73 of CPA 2019 by Dhr/Appellant aggrieved by the order dtd.22.08.2023 passed in EA/29/2021 on the file of Mandya District Commission.

 

  1. The matter is set today, awaiting service of notice on the Respondent, however, Appellant files postal track consignment to show, notice is served on 01.01.2024. Anyhow, Sri.Rupeshkumar, Advocate is present on behalf of Respondent and he seeks time to submit, since appellant pleads urgency, we heard him and examined the appeal papers.  

 

  1. Appellant/Dhr submits that District Commission in EA/29/2021 on 26.07.2023 ordered to close the EA for the present and on 22.08.2023, ordered ‘in view of divergent view expressed by this Commission dtd.26.07.2023, this memo does not survive for consideration. Hence, memo of Dhr advocate is rejected’. It is this order is assailed in this appeal, which in our view could be set aside summarily, since prima fiace Execution Commission failed to record sound reasons for closing the EA for the present. We could not find what are those divergent view expressed by the commission and how such divergent views give rise to close the EA for the present. In our view even if the EA is closed for the present, when an application/memo is filed by Dhr to rake up the matter could have been considered to hold further enquiry of the petition and by doing so no prejudice or harm would caused to any of the parties, since, adjudication has to be go by law, rules and acceptable regulations.  

 

  1. In the above such view of the matter, we found no grounds to call any objections of Respondent herein to decide on the appeal to avoid delay. In such conclusion, we proceed to allow the appeal. Consequently set aside the order dtd.26.07.2023 and 22.08.2023 respectively passed in EA/29/2021 on the file Mandya, District Commission, with a direction to restore EA/29/2021 and hold further enquiry, affording   opportunity to both parties.

 

  1. Notify copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties.

 

 

  Lady Member          Judicial Member             President          

 

*NS*     

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Huluvadi G. Ramesh]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Krishnamurthy B.Sangannavar]
JUDICIAL MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Divyashree.M]
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.