DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PALAKKAD

Dated this the  31^st day of  August, 2022

Present  :  Sri.Vinay Menon V., President        

             :   Smt.Vidya A., Member

             :   Sri. Krishnankutty N.K.,Member

Date of filing:   22/04/2022.

                                           CC/68/2022

    Anil Kumar  B,                                             -         Complainant           

    Nabanipa,14/478(1),

    Dolphin Nagar, Sekharipuram Post,

    Palakkad.

    (Party in person).   

                                                                  Vs

  1. The Manager,                       

      Big Bazzar, City Center,

      English Church Road, Thayilpatti,

      Sulthanpet,Palakkad-678 014.

 2.   The Managing Director,                                -             Opposite Parties

       Head Office, Knowledge Home,

      Shyam Nagar, Off Jogeshwari Vikhroli Linis Road,

      Mumbai-400 060.

      (Ex-party)

                                                 O R D E R

By Sri. Krishnankutty N.K.,Member

Pleadings of the complainant in brief.

1.      The complainant subscribed to the “Profi Club Membership” of the opposite party on 19.10.2021 paying Rs.10,000/- and purchased goods for 3 months @ Rs.1000/- per month.  Present balance in the membership card is Rs.7000/-.  Presently the shop is closed and hence the complainant approached the  opposite party for refund of the balance amount but they refused.

2.       Notices were sent to the opposite parties.  Notice to 2^nd opposite party was served.   Notice to 1^st opposite party was returned with endorsement “LEFT”.  Then notice was sent to the 1^st opposite party by e mail which was rejected.  Hence the  name of opposite parties were called in the open court and  were set ex-parte as there was no representation for the opposite parties.

3.     The complainant was absent for the subsequent sittings.  He had failed to file proof affidavit and mark any documents in evidence even after directions.  Hence the complaint was taken on for order based on merit.

4.       The continuous absence of the complainant during the proceedings of the case is a clear indication that the complainant is not interested to  proceed with the case.  Further, in the absence of proof affidavit, duly supported by marked evidence, this Commission is not in a position to examine the merits of the case.

5.      In the result, the complaint is dismissed.

        Pronounced in the open court on this the 31^st day of August, 2022

                                                                                       Sd/-

                                                                                    Vinay Menon V

                                          President

                                                                                             Sd/-

                                                                                          Vidya A

                                            Member

                                                                                             Sd/-

                                                                                  Krishnankutty N.K

                                                                                            Member

Appendix

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant :NIL

Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties:Nil

Witness examined from complainant’s side:- NIL

Witness examined from opposite party’s side:- NIL

Cost: NIL.