Date of Filing:20.07.2021
Date of Disposal:26.07.2021
BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
DATED:26th JULY 2021
PRESENT
Mr KRISHNAMURTHY B SANGANNANAVAR: JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mrs DIVYASHREE M: LADY MEMBER
REVISION PETITION No 53/2021
1. Mr.Gopinath
HUF Rep. by Gopinath-Kartha
Aged about 67 years
S/o Sreerana Setty
Aged about 68 years
2. Smt.Indira Gopinath
W/o Gopinath
Aged about 61 years
Both residing at
No.1273, Saimandiram Road
1st F Main, Girinagar 2nd Phase
Bengaluru-560 085
Rep. by Gopinath
(In person) Petitioners
-Vs-
1. Shrushti Blossms
84-85 2nd Cross, 1st Main
Bright Way Layout
Vasanthapura, Uttarahalli Hobli
Subramanyapura Post
Bengaluru-560 061
Rep. by OP4 Authorised Partner
2. Mr.P.S.Yeshwanth
S/o Late P.S. Sreenivasa Murty
3. Mrs. P.Rajeshwari Murthy
W/o Late P.S.Sreenivasa Murthy
Both are Residing at 112/1,
Srusti Srinivas, Near Renuka Temple
7th Cross, 2nd Phase, J.P.Nagar
Bengaluru-560 078
4. Mr.L.Balarama Reddy
S/o Late Krishna Reddy
5. Mrs. B.Padma
W/o L. Balarama Reddy
Both R/at No.1/59
Sai Nivas, Chikkakallasandra Main Road
Hanumagiri Layout
Padmanabhanagar
Bengaluru-560 061
6. Mr.Selvaraj Narayan
S/o Late A.Narayan
R/at No.6, Dharathi
30th Cross, 23rd Main
B.S.K.2nd Stage
Bengaluru-560 070
7. Mr.R.Jayaram
S/o Late Ramachander Pillai
R/at No.627, Shankari Krupa
2nd Cross Street, Muneshwara Nagar
Subramanyapura Road
Bengaluru- 560 061 Respondents
-:O R D E R:-
Mr KRISHNAMURTHY B SANGANNANAVAR: JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. Commission heard the Revision Petitioner through VC.
2. We perused the impugned order dated 23.04.2021 passed in Consumer Complaint No.739/2020 by III Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru (for short DCDRC)
3. The matter is set for admission. Office registered this case as Revision Petition, which in our opinion is not correct. Secondly, the Petitioner in his Revision Petition sought for review of the impugned order passed by III Additional DCDRC, Bengaluru dated 24.03.2021, is also incorrect, since section 50 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 provides for “power to review any of the order passed by it if there is an error apparent on the face of the record, either to pass own motion or on an application made by any of the parties within thirty days of such order’’. It is to be noted herein that impugned order is passed by DCDRC and not by this Commission as such question of exercising powers vested under Section 50 does not arise at all.
4. However, even if for any reason, the Revision Petition has to be considered as if filed under Section 41 of CP Act, 2019 as an appeal, in considering the fact alleged by the complainant as found from the papers along with the records, consideration of IA filed by the complainant under Section 38 of CP Act, 2019 is in aid to dispose of the complaint, as such as the matter is already fixed for recording evidence of complainant by 15.05.2021. In other words, complaint is still pending for an enquiry.
In the above such circumstances, we proceed to pass the order:
If the Petitioner herein is still intend to sought for review of the impugned order, question of exercising powers vested under Section 50 of CP Act, 2019 does not arise at all.
As the Consumer Complaint is still pending for an enquiry, is just and proper to leave the matter to the DCDRC, whether the documents sought under IA are absolutely necessary or not for the purpose of recording a finding on the main issue arose in the Consumer Complaint.
Accordingly, dispose of the Petition as if an Appeal filed under Section 41 of CP Act, 2019.
Lady Member Judicial Member
*s
