CC/452/2021

Date of Filing: 04.12.2021                                                    

                                                   Date of Disposal: 08.06.2023

BEFORE THE III ADDITIONAL BANGALORE URBAN

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

BENGALURU – 560 027.

DATED THIS THE 8^th DAY OF JUNE 2023  

 CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO: 452/2021    

PRESENT:

SRI.RAJU K.S,

SMT.REKHA SAYANNAVAR,:MEMBER

Sri.V. Nagaraja,

Aged Major

No.17, Vasu Kannan Nilaya,

IInd Floor, 1^st Main, 5^th Cross,

Batarayanapura, Mysore Road,

Party in Person                                                           COMPLAINANT.

The Assistant P.F. Commissioner,

S.R.O, Whitefield, P.F. Office,

K.R. Puram

(Rep. by Smt. Sandhya Jamadagni, Advocate)...OPPOSITE PARTY.

//JUDGEMENT//

BY SMT. REKHA SAYANNAVAR, MEMBER

01.    The present complaint is filed Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 with a prayer to direct the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.63,018/- (Rupees Sixty three thousand and eighteen only) with interest and further to pay the cost of the litigation and to grant such other reliefs as this Commission feels fit in the interest of Justice and Equity.

02.    The complainant is the party in person who had  his pension account in the SBI Bank, N.R. Colony Branch, Bengaluru.  The amount of pension per month was received as Rs.1,167/-.(Rupees One thousand one hundred and sixty seven only)  The claim of the complainant is that he had not received his monthly pension from 01.04.2018 from the opposite party. When he approached SBI Bank to the shock and surprise of the complainant he got to know that his pension account had been stopped. Due to which he could not get his pension. The act of the opposite party caused mental agony to the complainant. The complainant was constrained to issue legal notice on 29.07.2021.  The said legal notice was duly served upon on opposite party.  But the opposite party not replied to the said legal notice. The complainant left with no other alternatives to approach this Commission for redressel of his grievance under CP Act 2019 for deficiency of service of opposite party.  Hence, this complaint. 

03.   The notice of the complaint was duly served on opposite party, the counsel for the opposite party filed detailed version, partly denied the averments made by the complainant.   

04.   The points that would arise for consideration are as under:

i) Whether the complainant has proved the deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

ii) If so, to what relief the complainant is entitled for?

iii) What order ?

05.  Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 & 2:  In the Negative.

Point No.3 :  As per the final order for the following;

REASONS

06. POINT NO.1 & 2:-

To avoid the repetition of the facts of the complaint we have discussed both the points together. The complainant had filed this complaint for the alleged deficiency of services of the opposite party.

07.   The point to be noted here is that this commission has observed that the notice of this complaint was duly served upon the opposite party. The counsel for the opposite party filed detailed version, partly denied the averments made by the complainant.  Further on perusal of the order sheet, it appears that the case was posted for the evidence affidavit of the complainant on  31.01.2022.

08.   Since  from  11.03.2022   till this day the complainant remained absent and didn't let his affidavit evidence. It is the burden on the complainant to prove his complaint through his affidavit evidence and documentary evidence as contemplated under Section 38(6) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.  The complainant did not file any affidavit in the form of his evidence.

09.   Section 38(9) of Consumer Protection Act 2019 contemplates that the District commission shall have the same powers as are vested in a civil court under the code of civil procedure, while trying a suit in respect of reception of evidence as affidavits. Therefore, the complainant shall tender the sworn affidavit evidence by entering into witness box. That has not been complied by the complainant in the present complaint in hand. The complainant had failed to prove the burden casted on him. Hence, the complainant has failed to prove the deficiency of services as alleged.  Accordingly, we answer Point No.1 and 2 in negative.

10. POINT NO.3:- In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following;

ORDER

The complaint is dismissed.  No order as to costs.

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties and return extra copies of the pleading and evidence to the parties.

Applications pending, if any, stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by him, the transcript corrected, revised and then pronounced in the open Commission on 8^th day of June, 2023)   

(REKHASAYANNAVAR)       (RAJU.K.S)          (SHIVARAMA. K)    

                                   //ANNEXURE//

Witness examined for the complainant side:

-NIL-

Documents marked for the complainant side:

-NIL-

 Witness examined for the opposite party side: 

Documents marked for the Opposite Parties side:

(REKHA SAYANNAVAR)      (RAJU.K.S)           (SHIVARAMA. K)