Kerala

StateCommission

A/11/49

VILLGE OFFICER,VENKITANGU - Complainant(s)

Versus

SIMSON.K.V - Opp.Party(s)

S.VIJAYAKUMARAN

08 Feb 2011

ORDER

 
First Appeal No. A/11/49
(Arisen out of Order Dated 04/09/2010 in Case No. CC/07/182 of District Trissur)
 
1. VILLGE OFFICER,VENKITANGU
VENKITANGU
TRISSUR
KERALA
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. SIMSON.K.V
RETD POST MASTER,PADINJARE ANGADI,ARANATTUKARA
TRISSUR
KERALA
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONARABLE MR. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU PRESIDENT
  SRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

FIRST APPEAL  49/2011

JUDGMENT DATED: 08..02..2011

 

PRESENT

JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU                   : PRESIDENT

SRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR              : MEMBER

 

1. Village Officer, Venkitangu,                 : APPELLANTS

     Thrissur District.

 

2. Tahsildar, Chavakkad,

    Thrissur District.

 

3. District Collector,

     Thrissur District.

 

(By Adv.S.vijayakumaran, Addl.Dist.Govt.Pleader)

 

           Vs.

Simson.K.V.,                                             : RESPONDENT

S/o Kidangan Varkey,

Retd.Post Master,

Padinjare Angadi,

Aranattukara,

Thrissur.

 

JUDGMENT

 

JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU         : PRESIDENT

 

 

          Appellants are the opposite parties/Revenue authorities of the Government in CC.182/07 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur.  The Forum has allowed the complaint and cancelled Ext.P7 demand notice.

          2. The case of the complainant is that he had availed a loan under the low income group housing scheme for a period of 30 years. Subsequently on 30.11.2001 the complainant sent a letter to the opposite parties requested to inform the balance amount of the loan if any.  The opposite parties intimated as per letter dated 31..5..04 that the balance amount due is Rs.3203/-.  The complainant paid the amount and requested for return of the title deed and connected documents but the same were not returned and the opposite party demanded to pay Rs.6722/- further.

          3. It is the case of the opposite parties that letter dated 31.5.04 was sent without calculating the balance amount which used to be paid only at the time when the documents are returned.

          4.  The complainant has produced Ext.P1 to P8 documents.  No evidence has been adduced by the opposite parties. 

          5. We find that in the absence of any evidence produced by the opposite parties it is not possible to hold that the Forum has committed any error in disposing of the matter.  It is not disputed that the opposite party had intimated the complainant that the amount due is Rs.3203/- and it is for the opposite parties to explain as to how it happened and also as to how much is the exact amount due.  In the absence of any evidence in this regard we find that there is no scope for admitting the appeal. In the result appeal is dismissed in limine.

          Office will forward the copy of this order to the Forum urgently.

 

 

          JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU                 : PRESIDENT

 

 

          S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR            : MEMBER

 

 

Ps.

 

 
 
[HONARABLE MR. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU]
PRESIDENT
 
[ SRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR]
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.