Karnataka

StateCommission

A/1164/2024

BSG PROPERTIES LTD. . HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT NO.2048 S-BLOCK 3RD STAGE HINKAL ROAD HINKAL MYSORE-570017. - Complainant(s)

Versus

V WILLIAM FRANKLIN - Opp.Party(s)

KIRAN K

26 Nov 2024

ORDER

KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
BASAVA BHAVAN, BANGALORE.
 
First Appeal No. A/1164/2024
( Date of Filing : 04 Jan 2024 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 31/10/2023 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/96/2022 of District Mysore)
 
1. BSG PROPERTIES LTD. . HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT NO.2048 S-BLOCK 3RD STAGE HINKAL ROAD HINKAL MYSORE-570017.
BRANCH OFFICE AT KBR COMPLEX KRISHNARAJPET MYSURU HASSAN ROAD K R PET TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT
MYSURU
KARNATAKA
2. KIRAN KUMAR BS
S/O SHIVANNA B S,AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, CHAIRMAN BSG PROPERTIES LTD., BUKANAKERE KRISHNARAJPET K R PET MANDYA DIST
MANDYA
KARNATAKA
3. ARUN B S S/O SHIVANNA B S
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,MANAGING DIRECTOR BSG PROPERTIES LTD BUKANAKERE KRISHNARAJPET K R PET TALUK MANDYA DIST
MANDYA
KARNATAKA
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. V WILLIAM FRANKLIN
S/O LATE S VEDAMUTHU . AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,R/AT ,NO. 518, NORTH PARK AVENUE, 7TH CROSS, ROOPA NAGAR, BOGADI, MYSORE-570026
MYSURU
KARNATAKA
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Ravishankar PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt.Sunita Channabasappa Bagewadi MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 26 Nov 2024
Final Order / Judgement

 

 

ORDER ON ADMISSION

MR. RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

        Perused the certified copy of the order and memorandum of appeal and the order sheet, the appellant is not present to submit his arguments on admission of this appeal.  The District Commission directed this appellant to refund an amount of Rs.3,20,000/- and also directed to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- for deficiency in service and Rs.5,000/- litigation expenses.  The complainant initially approved for site allotment and paid the above said amount as an advance. Due to non-development of the site, the complainant approached the District Commission and sought for refund.  The District Commission after accepting the documents produced by both the parties had directed this appellant to refund the above said amount.  The reason for directing this appellant for refund is that, this appellant had not developed the layout.  We don’t find any irregularity in the order passed by the District Commission.

 2.     This appellant has also not deposited the statutory amount at the time of filing this appeal and also not submitted convincing arguments.  Accordingly, the appeal deserves to be dismissed, hence we proceed to pass the following:-

O R D E R

The appeal is dismissed.  No order as to cost.

The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the concerned District Consumer Commission for disbursement of the same to the complainant.

Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as concerned District Consumer Commission.

 

(Sunita .C. Bagewadi)                   (Ravishankar)      

        Member                                 Judicial Member

 ARD*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Ravishankar]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt.Sunita Channabasappa Bagewadi]
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.