Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Shalini Srivastava vs General Manager Thyrocare & Others on 13 February, 2024

  	 Cause Title/Judgement-Entry 	    	       STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UP  C-1 Vikrant Khand 1 (Near Shaheed Path), Gomti Nagar Lucknow-226010             First Appeal No. A/170/2024  ( Date of Filing : 06 Feb 2024 )  (Arisen out of Order Dated 24/01/2024 in Case No. CC/323/2022 of District Lucknow-I)             1. Shalini Srivastava  14A Yamuna Vihar Near Kalash Marriage Lawn Chinhat Lucknow 226028 UP ...........Appellant(s)   Versus      1. General Manager Thyrocare   & others         D-37/1 M.I.D.P  Turbhey opposite sandoz navi mumbai 400403 ...........Respondent(s)       	    BEFORE:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PRESIDENT            PRESENT:      Dated : 13 Feb 2024    	     Final Order / Judgement    

ORAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,                            UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW                  A/170/2024 Shalini Srivastava V/s General Manager, Thyrocare and another                         13-02-2024                    BY MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR, PRESIDENT                                                  ORDER This is an appeal filed by the appellant/complainant under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order passed by the learned District Consumer Commission-I, Lucknow in Complaint Case No. 323/2022 dated 24-01-2024 by which the aforesaid complaint has been dismissed in default of the complainant.

Sri Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel for the appellant appeared.

            I have heard learned Counsel for the appellant at the admission stage itself and perused the impugned order as well as record.

            I have also gone through the memo of appeal and have considered the submission made by learned Counsel for the appellant. The appellant/complainant has given sufficient reasons for her absence.

            Considering the facts and circumstances of the case the appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by the District Consumer Commission-I, Lucknow is set aside and the case is remanded back to the District Consumer Commission-I, Lucknow with request to restore the Complaint Case No. 323/2022; Shalini Srivastava V/s Thyrocare and others to its original number and decide the complaint expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order in accordance with law. It is made clear that unnecessary adjournments will not be allowed to either of the parties.

            A copy of this order will be served by the appellant before the District Consumer Commission-I, Lucknow within a period of four weeks from today.

Let copy of this order be made available to the parties as per rules.

The Stenographer is requested to upload this order on the website of this Commission at the earliest.

             

                           ( JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR )                                                               PRESIDENT                                                           Pnt.

      [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR] PRESIDENT