IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  COMMISSION, KOLLAM

Dated this the   28^th      Day of  November   2022

  Present: -      Sri. E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim, B.A, LL.M. President

            Smt.S.Sandhya Rani, Bsc, L.L.B,Member

                        Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member

                                                            CC.411/2020

Lillykutty MB                                                             :           Complainant

Sarala Sadan

Kumbalam, Kollam-691501.

[By Adv.P.Sajeev Babu]

V/s

1. Mary Rani Trading LLP                                             :           Opposite parties

          Regd.Office:10/1, Popular Tower

         Vakayar P.O, Konni

         Pathanamthitta-689698.

       Represented by its Designated Partner

       Thomas Daniel.

2. Y.Mathew Panicker

          Former Branch Manager

        Mary Rani Trading LLP

        Kundara

        Maliyekkal Mathew Bhavan,

         Punnamukku, Perumpuzha P.O-691504.

3. T.Mathunni Panicker

         Branch Manager

        Mary Rani Trading LLP, Kundara
       Residing at,

       Plavila Thekkathil

        Raju Nivas, Ambipoika

        Kundara-691501.

FINAL    ORDER

E.M.MUHAMMED IBRAHIM , B.A, LL.M, President

This is a case based on a complaint filed U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act against Popular Traders  and two Branch Managers by claiming refund of Rs.4,20,000/-  covered by two LLP deposits made by the complainant at the office of the opposite parties, compensation and costs. 

Though notice was served opposite parties remained absent and they were set exparte.  Though the case was posted for recording exparte evidence,  the complainant has not turned up and adduced exparte evidence.  Today when the case was called in the bench for recording exparte evidence the learned counsel for the complainant  submitted that he has no instruction from the complainant.  The submission was recorded.

In the circumstances we are of the view that the complainant is not intending to adduce any oral evidence.  The two documents produced along with complaint are only unattested photo copy of the alleged  LLP receipts.   In view of Section 114(i)of the Indian Evidence Act  copy of the LLP receipt cannot be acted up on without producing the original or examining the complainant.  In the circumstances there is absolutely no evidence to prove the allegations in the complaint and the complaint is only to be dismissed.

In the result complaint stands dismissed.

Dated this the     28^th   day of   November   2022.

E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim:Sd/-

S.Sandhya Rani:Sd/-

          Stanly Harold:Sd/-

           Forwarded/by Order

         Senior Superintendent