Maharashtra

StateCommission

CC/11/65

PINNINTI VEERA BHARAT REDDY - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S CONCORDE MOTORS LTD - Opp.Party(s)

H S THAKKAR

29 Mar 2011

ORDER

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
 
Complaint Case No. CC/11/65
 
1. PINNINTI VEERA BHARAT REDDY
RESIDING AT B/102 SUMAN APT CO-OP HSG SOC (PROP) TANK ROAD ORLEM MALAD WEST MUMBAI
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/S CONCORDE MOTORS LTD
WORLI SHOWROOM AT SHIVSAGAR ESTATE "D" BLOCK DR ANNIE BEASENT ROAD WORLI MUMBAI
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
2. TATA ENGINEERING & LOCOMOTIVE CO LTD
O/AT BOMBAY HOUSE 24 HOMI MODI STREET HUTATMA CHOWK MUMBAI
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 Hon'ble Mr. S.R. Khanzode PRESIDING MEMBER
 Hon'ble Mrs. J.D.Yengal MEMBER
 
PRESENT:H S THAKKAR , Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
ORDER

Per Mr.S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

Heard Mr.H.S.Thakkar-Advocate for the executant complainant. 

Undisputed facts are that the original complainant in respect of delivery of the vehicle and related issue alleged deficiency in service on the part of the opponents and consumer complaint bearing no.161/2000 was filed.  On hearing it was dismissed.  Therefore, the original complainant took the matter in appeal before the State Commission.  Appeal was allowed and compensation was awarded along with the direction to deliver a car.  The opponents in the said consumer complaint, who are opponents before us also, took up the matter in revision before the Hon’ble National Commission.  The Revision came to be dismissed confirming the order passed by the State Commission in appeal.  Thereafter, complainant filed execution proceeding before the forum.  Opponents partly complied with the directions given.  It is now submitted at the bar that execution proceedings are no more pending.

It is further contended on behalf of the complainant that by advocate’s notice dated 24/04/2010, it demanded interest of `34,37,566/-, which was awarded by the Commission in appeal.  However, dispute regarding payment of this interest is not settled and, therefore, this consumer complaint is filed.

We asked Ld.counsel as to how this separate consumer complaint is maintainable since the matter can be taken before the forum since it relates to earlier complaint and execution arising out of it filed in the forum.  We received no satisfactory answer.  Since dispute was already settled in appeal before the State Commission, supra, any issue relating to the non compliance of the said order needs to be taken in execution before the forum only. There is no question of filing any separate consumer complaint for the same.  Thus, finding this consumer complaint devoid of any merit, we pass the following order:-

                                      ORDER

Consumer complaint stands dismissed in limine.

No order as to costs.

Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.  

 

Pronounced

Dated 29th March, 2011.

 

 
 
[Hon'ble Mr. S.R. Khanzode]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[Hon'ble Mrs. J.D.Yengal]
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.