Maharashtra

Central Mumbai

CC/12/149

MR HARI GOPAL BOHRA - Complainant(s)

Versus

THREE SIXTY DEGREE HIMALAYA TRAVELS PVT. LTD, - Opp.Party(s)

DINESH GUCHIYA

10 Apr 2014

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CENTRAL MUMBAI
Puravatha Bhavan, 2nd Floor, General Nagesh Marg, Near Mahatma Gandhi Hospital
Parel, Mumbai-400 012
 
Complaint Case No. CC/12/149
 
1. MR HARI GOPAL BOHRA
SALASAR NAGAR NO.24, 2ND FLOOR, NAVGHAR ROAD, BHAYANDAR-EAST, DIST- THANE-401105.
2. MRS CHANCHAL BOHRA
SALASAR NAGAR NO.24, 2ND FLOOR, NAVGHAR ROAD, BHAYANDAR-EAST, DIST- THANE-401105.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. THREE SIXTY DEGREE HIMALAYA TRAVELS PVT. LTD,
809, Ijjima Compex , Raheja metroplex Behind Goregaon Sports Club, Near Infinityt Mall,Malad Link Road Malad(W).
Mumbai 400 064
Maharashtra
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. B.S.WASEKAR PRESIDENT
 HON'ABLE MR. H.K.BHAISE MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
Mr.Ramdas Kavde, Adv. H/F Mr.Dinesh Guchiya, Adv. for the Complainant
 
For the Opp. Party:
None present for the opponent
 
ORDER

1)                Complainant is absent. Mr.Ramdas Kavde, Adv. H/F Mr.Dinesh Guchiya, Adv. for the complainant is present. On perusal of Roznama, complaint was admitted on 14th June, 2012. Notice was issued to the opponent returnable on 19th July, 2012. On 19th July, 2012, notice was returned by postal department with the remark that ‘the opponent left the address’. The complainant was directed to give new address of the opponent. Since July-2012, matter was pending for giving new address of the opponent. No address was given by the complainant till April-2013 i.e. for nine months. On 10th April, 2013, the complainant gave new address of the opponent. Thereafter, the matter was pending for service to the opponent. The notice of opponent was returned back on 27th November, 2013 with the remark that the opponent left the address. Since then, no steps are taken by the complainant for giving new address to serve the opponent. Today also, the complainant is absent. His advocate seeking adjournment for giving new address of the opponent. 

2)                As stated above, matter is pending only for service on the opponent for about two years. It shows that the complainant is not diligent to conduct the matter. Therefore, the complaint is dismissed for want of prosecution. 
 
Dated 10th April, 2014
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. B.S.WASEKAR]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'ABLE MR. H.K.BHAISE]
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.