Karnataka

StateCommission

A/1465/2012

Parthasarathi Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Chairman, BWSSB - Opp.Party(s)

J.Nagaraj

02 Aug 2021

ORDER

KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
BASAVA BHAVAN, BANGALORE.
 
First Appeal No. A/1465/2012
( Date of Filing : 23 Jul 2012 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 18/04/2012 in Case No. CC/384/2012 of District Bangalore 1st & Rural Additional)
 
1. Parthasarathi Sharma
S/o Late Somashekara Sharma, A/a 46 years, R/at No.240, 1st C Main Road, Kengeri Satellite Town, Bangalore - 560 060. .
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. The Chairman, BWSSB
Cauvery Bhavan, Mysore Bank Circle, Bangalore - 560 001 .
2. The AEE, BWSSB(West)
No.5, Nagarabhavi Ring Road, Bangalore - 560 072 .
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Ravishankar PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt.Sunita Channabasappa Bagewadi MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 02 Aug 2021
Final Order / Judgement

BEFORE THE BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

Basava Bhavan, Sri Basaveswara Circle, High grounds, Bangalore-560001.

 

Case No. - A/1465/2012


Appellant/s

1 . Parthasarathi Sharma .
S/o Late Somashekara Sharma, A/a 46 years, R/at No.240, 1st C Main Road, Kengeri Satellite Town, Bangalore - 560 060. .
(By J.Nagaraj)

-Versus-

Respondent/s

1 . The Chairman, BWSSB .
Cauvery Bhavan, Mysore Bank Circle, Bangalore - 560 001 .
(By Prashanth T. Pandith)

2 . The AEE, BWSSB(West)
No.5, Nagarabhavi Ring Road, Bangalore - 560 072 .

02.08.2021

ORDER

Mr. RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.        The appellant/complainant filed this appeal way back in the year 2012 being aggrieved by the Order dt.18.04.2012 passed in CC.No.384/2012 on the file of 1st Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore wherein the District Commission has dismissed the complaint.

2.        The appellant not appeared before this Commission inspite of giving sufficient opportunities to address his arguments and to convince how the impugned order passed by the District Commission is not satisfactory and against to law. 

3.        The case called twice, appellant not present.

4.        We have perused the appeal memo.  Mere memorandum of appeal is not sufficient to hold the appeal in the absence of any arguments and convincement by the appellant.  As such, the appeal requires to be dismissed.  Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.

Forward free copies to both parties.

 

               Sd/-                                                       Sd/-

MEMBER                                                      JUDICIAL MEMBER

KCS*

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Ravishankar]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt.Sunita Channabasappa Bagewadi]
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.