Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/40/2020

Mrs.A.Abidha Begum, W/o.A.Abdur Reheman, 1/27, Somasundaram Avenue, Porur, Sakthi Nagar, Chennai 600 116. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Proprietor, Sudha Traders, Old No.26, New No.45, 2nd Venue, Ashok Nagar, Chennai-600 083. - Opp.Party(s)

M/s. G. Mutharasu

25 Nov 2022

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

 

BEFORE :                  Hon’ble Justice R. SUBBIAH                                        PRESIDENT

 Thiru R VENKATESAPERUMAL                                   MEMBER                        

                      

F.A.NO.40/2020

(Against order in C.C. No.217/2016 on the file of the DCDRC, Chennai (South))

 

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022

 

Mrs. A. Abidha Begum,

W/o. Mr. A. Abdur Rahman,

No.1/27, Somasundaram Avenue,                            

Porur,                                                                  

Sakthi Nagar,

Chennai – 600 116.                                                        … Appellant / Complainant.                                                            

                                                                       

                                                         Vs.

 

The Proprietor,

Sutha Traders,

Old No.26, New No.45,

2^nd Avenue, Ashok Nagar,

Chennai – 600 083.                                              … Respondent / Opposite party.

 

 

Counsel for Appellant / Complainant          : M/s. G. Mutharasu

Counsel for Respondent / Opposite party  : M/s. T. Natarajan

 

This appeal coming before us 25.11.2022 and on hearing the arguments of both sides and on perusing the material records, this Commission made the following:-

ORDER

HON’BLE THIRU.  JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH, PRESIDENT.  ( Open Court).

  

1.       This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant against the order of the District Commission, Chennai (South) made in C.C.No.217/2016, dated 28.11.2018,  has dismissed the complaint for non-appearance and for non- filing of proof affidavit of the complainant for a long time.

2.           The appellant herein has filed the complaint as against the opposite party alleging deficiency of service for the following reliefs:

            (i) to refund the cost of the poor wood item of Rs.38,880/- with interest at the rate of 2% per month from 13.06.2014 to till the date of realization.

            (ii) To pay the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards punitive compensation for mental agony, inconvenience and hardship caused to the complainant with cost.

 

3.         In the said complaint, proof affidavit of the complainant has not been filed for a long time to prove the allegations made in the complaint  inspite of sufficient opportunities that were given to him.   Finally, when the matter came up on 28.11.2022, the complaint was dismissed for not filing of proof affidavit as well as for non-appearance of the complainant.  Against which, the present appeal has been filed.

4.         Though the conduct of the appellant exhibits the lethargic attitude, when the case had come up for hearing on 18.11.2022 in order to provide an opportunity to the appellant / complainant to prosecute the case on merits, this appeal was allowed on a condition that the appellant shall pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- to be payable to the Legal Aid Account, SCDRC drawn in favour of the Registrar, SCDRC, Chennai on or before 24.11.2022.  

5.         Today, when the matter again appeared in the list, it is reported by the Counsel for appellant that the conditional order has been complied with.  Hence, the order of the District Commission, Chennai (South) in C.C. No.217/2016 dt. 28.11.2018 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the District Commission, Chennai (South) with a direction to restore the complaint on their file.   The District Commission, Chennai (South) is further directed to issue fresh notice to the parties by fixing a fresh date of hearing and on their appearance to proceed with the case in accordance with law. 

            In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Commission, Chennai (South) in C.C. No.217/2016 dt.28.11.2018, and the DCDRC, Chennai (South) is directed to restore the compliant on the file for fresh disposal.

The District Commission, Chennai (South) is directed to issue fresh notice to the parties by fixing a fresh date of hearing and on their appearance to proceed with the case in accordance with law on merits.  

 

 

 

 

           Sd/-                                                                                              Sd/-

R VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                        R.SUBBIAH                        

         MEMBER                                                                             PRESIDENT