Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (COURT) B A R G A R H Consumer Complaint No. 64 of 2015. Sri Dhanu Behera S/o Late Manglu Behera, aged about 62 (sixty two) years, R/o Gangei, Po/Ps/Tah. Ambabhona, Dist. Bargarh (Odisha)(Dead). - Subhadra Behera, aged about 65(sixty five) years, wife of Dhanu Behera, Occupation- dependant, Resident of Gangei, Po/Ps. Ambabhona, Dist. Bargarh.
- Tikeswari Sidar, aged about 45(forty five) years, wife of Arakhita Sidar, Daughter of Dhanu Behera, Occupation- House wife, Resident of Baramkela, Po/Ps. Baramkela, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.)
- Hripriya Bhue, aged about 43(forty three), wife of Mohanlal Bhue, Daughter of Dhanu Behera, Occupation- House wife, Resident of Lelehar, Po. Uttam, Ps. Ambabhona, Dist. Bargarh.
- Subal Behera, aged about 38(thirty eight) years, son of Dhanu Behera, Occupation-Cultivation, Resident of Gangei, Po/ps. Ambabhona, Dist. Bargarh.
- Bishnupriya Bhoi, aged about 35(thirty five) years, wife of Bijaya Kumar Bhoi, Daughter of Dhanu Behera, Occupation- House wife, Resident of Antaradi, Po/ps. Ambabhona, Dist. Bargarh.
- Padmini Bhue, aged about 33(thirty three) years, wife of Premlal Bhue, Daughter of Dhanu Behera, Occupation- House wife, Resident of Kantipali, Po. Ps. Baramkela, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.).
- Goura Beher, aged about 31(thirty one) years, Son of Dhanu Behera, Occupation- Cultivation, Resident of Gangei, Po/Ps. Ambabhona, Dist. Bargarh.
- Bidyadhar Behera, aged about 28(twenty eight) years, Son of Dhanu Behera, Occupation- Cultivation, Resident of Gangei, Po/Ps. Ambabhona, Dist. Bargarh.
........ ....... ....... ........ Complainants. -V e r s u s- State Bank of India, represented through its Branch Manager, Ambabhona Branch, At/Po/Ps. Ambabhona, Dist. Bargarh (Odisha). ....... ....... ...... ......... Opposite Party. ORDER PASSED BY DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM(COURT) BARGARH ON DT. 22/07/2019. Dt.22/07/2019. Case posted to-day for hearing. Parties present through their respective Advocates. However, the advocate for the Complainant filed a memo to not press the complaint against the OP, in view of the fact that after several reminder from his side, who did not turn up nor instructed him to conduct the case and finally advised him to not press the same, as has been mentioned therein in the memo. Having gone through the same and hearing the advocate for the party concern personally we feel that the party (Complainant) is not interest to proceed with the case further. Hence, the memo filed by the Advocate for the Complainant is allowed and accordingly the case is dismissed and disposed off in the open Court to-day on Dt.22/07/2019. Sd/- Sd/- (Ajanta Subhadarsinee) ( Sri Krishna Prasad Mishra) M e m b e r(w). P r e s i d e n t. Upload by Sri Dusmanta Padhan Office Assistant (DMA) | |