Karnataka

Bangalore 4th Additional

CC/10/2122

Sri.Srekrishna.R. Aged about 32 Years S/o. Sri.G. Ramappa. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Smt. Anitha Ganesh Aged about 34 Years W/o. Sri. Ganesh Proprietrix, A.V. Technologists. - Opp.Party(s)

G.Papi Reddy

06 Oct 2010

ORDER


BEFORE THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMERS DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BANGALORE URBAN,Ph:22352624
No:8, 7th floor, Sahakara bhavan, Cunningham road, Bangalore- 560052.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/10/2122

Sri.Srekrishna.R. Aged about 32 Years S/o. Sri.G. Ramappa.
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Smt. Anitha Ganesh Aged about 34 Years W/o. Sri. Ganesh Proprietrix, A.V. Technologists.
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Sri D.Krishnappa

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




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.

ORDER

Heard the counsel for the complainant regarding admission of this complaint. This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the Op based on agreement entered into between them on 31/12/2009 wherein the Op had agreed to provide data to the complainant and the complainant who is an IT expert had agreed to fill up the data to the forms as desired by the Op and in pursuance of that agreement complainant had paid non- refund of Rs.50,000/-. Then the Op though supplied voluminous data to the complainant but thereafter had not supplied required software and as the result, the complainant was forced to purchase software elsewhere and fill up the forms of the complainant and returned 7000 records and the Op has not paid the cost of that work amounting to Rs.3,26,000/-. Therefore, they sought for direction to the Op to pay that amount besides damages. On perusal of these materials, we find that there is no relationship of consumers & Op and deficiency alleged is nothing but according to the complainant a contractual breach alleged to have been committed by the Op which do not fall within the definition of the service and therefore, complaint in our view is not maintainable and the remedy to the complainant if at all he is aggrieved is to approach the Civil Court and hence, complaint is dismissed at the stage of admission.




......................Sri D.Krishnappa