Orissa

Rayagada

CC/144/2018

SRI Rajendra Prasad Dolei - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, m/S Jayabheri Autonituves Pvt., - Opp.Party(s)

Self

20 Apr 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION RAYAGADA, ODISHA.

Date of Institution: 29.11.2018

      Date of Final Hearing: 05.04.2023

          Date of  Pronouncement: 20.04.2023

 

                                    CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 144 / 2018

Sri Rajendra  Prasad Dolai,

S/O: Sri Subash Chandra  Dolai,

Babuli  Nagar,

 Po: Gunupur, Dist: Rayagada.765 022

(Through Self for the Complainant)                           …Complainant

 

Versus

1.The   Manager,

M/S. Jayabheri   Automotives Pvt. Ltd.,

Visakhapatnam (Andhrapradesh).

 (Sri K.Sitalaxmi, Advocate, Vizag  for the   O.P. No.1 )

2.The  Managing  Director,

Maruti  Suzuki  India Pvt. Ltd.,

Vasant  Kunj New Delhi

(Sri Rabi  Prasad  Mohapatra, Advocate for the   O.P. No.2 )

…Opposite Parties

 

Present:          1. Sri Rajendra Kumar Panda, President.

            2. Sri Satish Kumar Panigrahi, Member.

ORDER

Sri  Rajendra  Kumar  Panda, President.

Brief facts of the case:-

Case in hand is the allegation of  deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the O.Ps  for  non remove  of  defects within warranty period  towards  four wheeler  Swift   Dzire  Car  bearing  Regd. No.OD-18-D- 7789  which  the complainant sought  redressal.

On being noticed the O.Ps  appeared before this commission through their learned counsel  and filed  written version.

During the course of  hearing  the complainant is  absent on repeated call though notices has been duly served upon him.

On perusal of the documents it is revealed that despite several adjournments taken  by the complainant for the purpose of filing relevant papers, the complainant failed to produce any documents in support of his claim.  When the pleading of  the complainant in support of his claim have been denied by the  O.P. the complainant is duty bound   to substantiate his claim by producing relevant documents there for, but he has failed to do so.  On the basis of mere pleadings of the complainant, without any supporting  evidence, no positive finding can be recorded in regard to his claim. Hence, we are constrained to hold that the petition made by the complainant  is  devoid of any merit.

The complainant failed to perform his obligatory  duty to remain present  and adduce evidence.

 In the result this commission dismiss the  complaint for default U/S- 38(3)© of the C.P.Act,2019.  Miscellaneous  order if any  delivered by this  commission  relating to this case  stands vacated. 

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

The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.

File be consigned to the record room along with a copy of this Judgment.

    (S. K. PANIGRAHI)                                                     (R. K. PANDA)

MEMBER                                                                 PRESIDENT

 

PRONOUNCED ON   20.04.2023