Appeal filed on: 26.O8.2027 Appeal disposed on: 12.02.2026 BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (ADDITIONAL BENCH)

DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF FEBRUARY,20126 CORAM: HON,BLE SRI.RAVI SHANKAR. JI,DICIAL ^MEMBER and HON'BLE SMT. SI'NITA CHANNASASAPPA ^{BAGEWADI . LIIDY MEMBER} scl29lAl640l2o/2t BETtrIEEN:

The Commissioner, City Municipal Council, Chickmagalur - 577 ^1O1..

... Appellant (Rep. by Mr.A.NagarajaPPa, Advocatel AND:

Sri Chandrashekara, S/o Late Naga, Aged about 41 Years, Residing at Pension Mohalla, C.M.C. Colony, Chickmagaluru - 577 101.

...Respondent (Rep. by Mr.V.D.Raviraj, Advocatef ORDER BY HON'BLE SRI RAVI SHANKAR ^- JUDICIAL MEMBER

1. The Appellant/Opposite Party in consumer complaint No.75l2O2O preferred this Appeal against the ^{Exparte order} dated 25.03.2021 passed by the District ^{Consumer Disputes} Redressal Commission, Chickmagalur ^a-fter appreciating ^the evidence and documents produced by the complainant ^had allowed the complaint directing this Appellant refund ^the advance amount of Rs. 1.75.000/- and also to ^pay

I

compensation of Rs.2O,00O/- along with litigation expenses of Rs.3,000/- against which the Appellant before this Commission.

2. Heard from the Respondent. There is no representation on behalf of Appellant. In spite of sufficient opportunity provided not argued the matter. The leamed counsel for Respondent submits that Opposite party have arranged the public auction for the tenants of the shop No.6 block No.1 and as per the terms and conditions of the tender process the complainant has deposited the refund advance amount of Rs. 1,75,000/- under receipt Nos.676339 dated 27.11.2011 for a sum of Rs.50,000/-, No.gg4330 dated 04. 12.2012 for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and another No.8844i2 dated 04.12.2012 for a sum of Rs.75,000/_, but the appellant Authority have not come forward to provide possession of the said shop. The complainant inspite of successful bidder has not received either the possession of the shop or not refund of the deposited amount. Hence, he approached the District Commission alleging deficiency in service and sought for refund of the said amount. This Appellant placed Exparte before the District Commission and not contested the matter in spite of service of notice, whereas they preferred this Appeal without any valid reasons. The grounds urged by the Appellant for setting aside the order passed by the District Commission is only that complainant had not occupied the shop provided but the Appellant Authority has not at all notified which shop has to be occupied and no intimation was provided and complainant waited lor long time for such intimation.

Hence, he liled a complaint before District Commission. At least they could have approach District Commission for providing such shop. Even that was not done by the Appellant authority they placed Exparte Appellant shown arrogance to the notice issued. Hence, prays to dismiss tlle appeat in the interest of ^justice and equity and confirm ^the

order passed by the District Commission.

3. Perused the certified copy of the order and

memorandum of appeal and documents produced ^we noticed that no proper explanation was provided by this Appellant why he has not contested the matter before District Commission and no proper reasons provided why he placed Exparte. The District Commission after noticing that no property was provided to complainant after taking an amount of Rs. 1,75,000/- as per the auction. Considering the said documents, the District Commission directed this Appellant to refund the amount of Rs. 1,75,000/- along with compensation of Rs.20,000/- and Rs.3,000/- towards litigation expenses. The grounds urged for setting aside the order passed by the District Commission is that the complainant will not fall within the definition of Consumer Protection Act and District Commission failed to appreciate the said facts and allowed the complaint. Hence, prays to set aside the order passed by the District Commission. This Appellan