Karnataka

StateCommission

A/2707/2024

SONY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED - Complainant(s)

Versus

SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR B S/O LATE BABURAYA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS - Opp.Party(s)

SAUMYA BADIGINENI

26 Nov 2024

ORDER

KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
BASAVA BHAVAN, BANGALORE.
 
First Appeal No. A/2707/2024
( Date of Filing : 21 Oct 2024 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 03/09/2024 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/82/2024 of District Chikmagalur)
 
1. SONY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
A-18, MOHAN CO-OPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, MATHURA ROAD NEW DELHI 110044
2. PAI INTERNATIONAL ELECTRONICS LIMITED
CHANDRA TOWERS OPP. SREE KANNIKA PARAMESHWARI TEMPLE, M.G. ROAD CHIKKAMAGALURU 577 101
CHIKKAMAGALURU
KARNATAKA
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR B S/O LATE BABURAYA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
SUPRIYA NILAYA, NEHRU NAGAR, CHIKKAMAGALURU 577101
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Krishnamurthy B.Sangannavar PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Divyashree.M MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 26 Nov 2024
Final Order / Judgement

26.11.2024:

ORDER

Delivered by Mr.K.B.Sangannanavar. Prl.DJ (R) Judicial Member.

 

01.   This is an Appeal filed by opposite party Nos.1 & 2 in C.C. No.82/2024 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chikkamagaluru. 

 

02.   Learned counsel for Appellants would submit that, on 21.09.2024 counsel for opposite party Nos.1 & 2 had filed vakalat in the Office and filed version of OP No.2 along with an IA. In order to ascertain the said fact, we have examined the certified copy of the proceedings of DCDRC, Chikkamagaluru, in CC No.82/2024 commencing from 01.08.2024 and found that, on 03.08.2024 the District Commission had ordered to issue notice to opposite party Nos.1 & 2 and on 22.08.2024 listed the case for return of notice of opposite party Nos.1 & 2.  We found from this order-sheet that, notice was received by opposite party No.1 on 06.08.2024 and notice was received by opposite party No.2 on 09.08.2024 and in such circumstances when on 21.09.2024 noted down in the office about filing of version of opposite party No.2 along with an IA, DCDRC could have been considered on 30.09.2024, which is the next date posted for appearance of opposite party Nos.1 & 2.  In such circumstances of the proceedings, it would be just and proper to give direction to the District Commission to record the version of opposite party No.2 and to proceed with matter to hold an enquiry. Accordingly, directed the DCDRC to record the version as if filed on the date mentioned in the order sheet by the office and dispose-off the Appeal with no order as to costs. Issuance of notice of this appeal stands dispense with to avoid delay and expenditure to the complainant.    If  Version filed is returned to OP, is at liberty to submit the same and submitted the District Commission is directed to receive the same and proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

 

03.   Send copy of this Appeal order to both parties as well as to the concerned Commission for information.

          Sd/-                                                            Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                               JUDICIAL MEMBER

KNMP*

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Krishnamurthy B.Sangannavar]
PRESIDING 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.