Telangana

Mahbubnagar

CC/10/85

Balram S/o Yellappa, 63 years - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Tahasildar, Devarkadra mandal & another - Opp.Party(s)

Sri G.Narsimha Murthy

26 Aug 2011

ORDER

           

                                        BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM AT MAHABUBNAGAR

   Friday, the 26^th day of August, 2011

 

                                                           Present:- Sri P. Sridhara Rao, B.Sc., LL.B., President

                                                                            Sri A. Veerupakshi, B.A., LL.B., Member

 Smt. D. Nirmala, B.Com., LL.B., Member

 

                                                                                                                                               C.C.No. 85 Of  2010

 

Between:

Balram, S/o Yellappa, age 63 years, Agriculture, R/o 8-6-55,  Padmavathi Colony, Mahabubnagar.  

                                                                                               

    … Complainant

And  

 

1. The Thasildar, Devarkadra Mandal.
2. The Collector, Mahabubnagar.

                                                                                                             

  …Opposite Parties

This is a complaint filed under section 12 of C.P. Act, 1986 praying to direct the opposite parties to initiate proceedings for grant of succession of said lands in the name of complainant and to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- with costs and interest.

 

 This C.C. coming on before us this day in the presence of    Sri G. Narsimha Murthy, Advocate, Mahabubnagar for the complainant and Sri P.Bal Reddy, Govt. Pleader, Mahabubnagar for the opposite parties and having stoodover for consideration till this day, this Forum delivered the following:   

 

O R DE R

            Neat copy though filed, but it was taken away by the counsel, when he was asked to carryout the amendment.  At this stage, the complainant in person came and filed memo for withdrawal of the complaint on the ground that they have settled the matter, as such the complaint can be dismissed as not pressed.  The counsel for the complainant represented that he will file a separate memo for withdrawal of the complaint, instead of putting his signature as counsel for the complainant.  By representing so, he went away and did not turn up though the matter is passed over for a sufficient long time. 

 

          The complainant who is present in person in court hall started weeping by stating that he is suffering a lot since long time, and however, the matter is settled at last and therefore he is requesting to accept his memo and pass final order in the matter, so that he can live peacefully without any further disputes among his other brothers and family members. 

 

          Under the said circumstances and to give relief to the complainant as desired by him, the memo is accordingly recorded.  In view of the memo filed, the complaint is dismissed as not pressed.  No costs.

  

Pronounced by us in the open Forum, on this the 26^th day of   August, 2011.

 

 

MEMBER                             MEMBER                                PRESIDENT