State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sai Sadan Owners Welfare Association, ... vs Smt.Lakshmi Chilakamarri Tustin ... on 14 December, 2012
BEFORE THE A
BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: AT HYDERABAD.
FA.No.664/2012
against C.C.No.1023/2010 District Forum-I, Hyderabad.
Between
Sai Sadan Owners Welfare
Association, rep. by its President
16-11-20/13/1, Flat No.201
Saleemnagar Colony, Hyderabad. ..Appellant/
Opp.party
No.2
And
1.Smt.Lakshmi Chilakamarri W/o.late C.Narasimha Charyulu Aged about 71 years, Occ:Housewife r/o.10615, Bruns Drive Tustin CA92782, USA.
2. Sri C.Venkata Acharyulu S/o.late C.Narasimha Charyulu Aged about 68 years, Occ:Retd. Asst.
Registrar, R/o.Flat No.214, Plot No.32 Kranti Harika Engineering Syndicate Apartments, HUDA complex, Saroornagar Hyderabad.
3. Sri C.Ranga Charyulu S/o.late C.Narasimha Charyulu Aged about 63 years, Occ:Retd. Engineer R/o.A-44, Flat No.108, Plot No.32 Samskruthi Township Pocharam, Ghatkeswar Mandal, R.R.Dist.,
4. Sri Chilkamarri Bhaskara Charyulu S/o.late C.Narasimha Charyulu Aged about 60 years, Occ:Scientist, R/o.5927, Woberlin way Phonix AZ 85083 USA.
5. Sri C.Sesha Chary S/o.late C.Narasimha Charyulu Aged about 55 years, Occ:Pharmacist, R/o.1518, Palmerview, San Antonio TX, 78260, USA.
6. Sri Ram C.Chary (aka C.Ramanuja Chary) S/o.late C.Narasimha Charyulu Aged about 50 years, Occ:Software Engineer R/o.10615, Bruns Drive Tustin CA 92782. USA. ..Respondents/ Complainants (Respondents 1, 4, 5 and 6 are rep. by Respondent No.3)
7. M/s Sri Krishna Sai Constructions, Rep. by its M.D. Sri Ch.Venkateswara Rao, S/o.Ch.Krishna Plot No.22 & 23 H.No.8-3-684/22&23, LIC Colony Yellareddyguda, Hyderabad-73. Respondent/ O.P No.1 Counsel for the Appellant : M/s J.Prabhakar Counsel for the Respondents : Smt.M.Sasikala Devi R1to R6 M/s.P.Achutham Reddy R7 QUORUM: SMT.M.SHREESHA, HONBLE MEMBER, AND SRI S.BHUJANGA RAO, HONBLE MEMBER.
FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND TWELVE Order (Per Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) *** The appellant filed a memo which is signed by him, respondent No.3 and counsel for R7 stating that he complied with the order of District Forum and that they compromised the matter and as such the appeal be dismissed without costs.
Hence this appeal is dismissed as compromised. There shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/-MEMBER.
Sd/-Member.
JM Dt.14-12-2012.