Orissa

Ganjam

CC/53/2017

Prakash Kumar Dash, aged about 24 years, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Contractor, V. Vidyasagar Reddy, - Opp.Party(s)

Through Dr. Meenakshi Devi, Advocate for the Complainant

22 Aug 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, GANJAM, BERHAMPUR.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/53/2017
( Date of Filing : 23 Aug 2017 )
 
1. Prakash Kumar Dash, aged about 24 years,
S/o Prafulla Dash, Working as Supervisor at Toll Plaza, Located at K.M. 389, 609 Gurapalli, Khallikote, Ganjam, Odisha Resident of At/Po: Hat Sahi, Jaipur, Odisha.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Contractor, V. Vidyasagar Reddy,
Located at K.M. 389, 609, Gurapalli, Khallikote,Ganjam, Odisha, Residing at H. No. 26/B/A,Road No. 12, M.L.A. Colony, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad (A.P.)
2. The Employees Provident Fund Organization,
(Ministry of Labour & Employment), Govt. of India, 3-4-763, Bhabishyanodhi Bhawan, Barakatpur, Hyderabad, 500027.
3. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-cum-S.R.O,
Provident Fund Organization, Payal Talkies, New Bus Stand Road, Berhampur, Ganjam.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Satish Kumar Panigrahi PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Saritri Pattanaik MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Through Dr. Meenakshi Devi, Advocate for the Complainant, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 Through NONE for the Opp. Parties EXPARTE, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 22 Aug 2023
Final Order / Judgement

 

                                                DATE OF DISPOSAL: 22.08.2023

 

 

 

PER:   SRI SATISH KUMAR PANIGRAHI, PRESIDENT

 

            The complainant is found absent today on repeated call and he has not taken any steps also.

On perusal of case record it is found that, the Complainant has filed this case for deficiency in services rendered by the Opposite Parties. Accordingly the case was admitted on 06.09.2017 by the Commission and notice was also issued to the Ops on the same day i.e., 06.09.2017 vide No.:494(2). It is seen from the case record that notice sent to the O.P.No.1 returned back without any postal remark. The notice of the O.P.No.2 not returned back to this Commission within 30 days from the date of the notice. It deems that, the notice was served upon the op no.2. Hence the notice was sufficient. Thereafter, the O.P. No.2 is declared set exparte on dated 06.02.2018. The complainant did not attend the Commission since 27.12.2017 till today and not taken any steps in any point of time. The complainant probably does not want to proceed in this case any further. In view of above circumstances, the Commission feels to dispose of the case of the complaint.

Hence in the result, the present consumer complaint stands dismissed for non prosecution by the Complainant. No order as to cost.

This case is disposed of accordingly.

The Judgment be uploaded on the www.confonet.nic.in for the perusal of the parties.

A certified copy of this Judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 or they may download same from the www.confonet.nic.in to treat the same as if copy of the order received from this Commission.

The file is to be consigned to the record room along with a copy of this Judgment.

 

 

Pronounced on 22.08.2023.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Satish Kumar Panigrahi]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Saritri Pattanaik]
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.