BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : HYDERABAD.

F.A.NO.856 OF 2020

(against the orders in CC.No.212/2019 on the file of the District Commission- Ranga Reddy

Between:

1. Meeta Jain,

    W/o. Jitendra Jain,

Aged about 51 years, Occ: unemployed

2. Jitendra Jain

    W/o. Late Sh Mangal Chand Jain,

    aged about 54 years, Occ: unemployed

    Both present resident,

E7/1, RCI Colony, RCI Road, P.O.

Vignyana Kancha, P.O., Hyderabad – 500069,

(wef. 01 Jan 2021 resident of

Flat No.H28, 1302,

    AWHO, Sandeep Vihar,

    Whitefield – Hoskote Road,

    Kannamangala, Bengaluru,

    Karnataka – 560115.                          …Appellants/ Complainants

And

 1. Bharti Airtel, Bharti Airtel Limited,

    (A Bharti Enterprise) Bharti Crescent,

    1 Nelson Mandela Road, 

    Vasant Kunj, Phase II,

    New Delhi-110070

    Represented by it’s manager.

2. Ratnadeep Super Market (P) Ltd.,

    Meghna Plaza, 1^st Floor D-18,

    Wellington Road, Vikrampuri,

    Karkhana Secunderabad -500009,

    Andhra Pradesh,

    Email info@ratnadeepsupermarket.com 

    Represented by its manager.

3. Chairman, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India

    Mahanagar Doorsanchar Bhawan

    (next to Zakir Hussain College)

    Jawaharlal Nehru Marg (Old Minto Road)

    New Delhi: 110002 E-mail ID:ap@trai.gov.in,

    Represented by its manager.  

....Respondents/Opposite parties

Counsel for the Appellant/ Complainant:Sri Jitendra Jain(PIP)

Counsel for the Respondents/Opposite Parties :M/s. Gopi Rajesh   

        Associates – R1

: M/s.Shyam S.Agarwal-R2

: Sri Sudhakar Rao Kulkarni-R3

QUORUM: SRI JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL, HON’BLE PRESIDENT

FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND TWENTY ONE

*******

Oral Order:

1.    This is an appeal filed by the Appellant / Complainant under Section 41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 praying this Commission to allow the appeal by setting aside the order of the District Forum, Ranga Reddy passed in C.C.No.212 of 2019 dated 16.11.2020.

2.       In this batch of appeals, the Appellant Sri Jitendra Jain is said to have died on 23.04.2021.  Thereafter, this Commission has suo moto issued notices to the other Appellants/legal representatives of the deceased Jain, who are parties in the connected appeals and the same has been served as per the track record obtained from the postal authorities.  In spite of that, there is no appearance for the LRs/other Appellants in the connected appeals.  The learned counsel appearing for the Respondents are all present.  Since the deceased Appellant died more than seven months back, the appeal is liable to be dismissed has having been abated.

3.       Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.