AMWAY INDIA ENTERPRISES Vs. SOMAN H.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above appeal is preferred against the order dated 26.5.2005 passed by the CDRF, Thiruvanathapuram in OP No. 4 of 2002. The complaint therein was filed by the first respondent as complainant against the second respondent and the appellant as opposite parties 1 and 2 claiming refund of Rs. 15,000 on the ground of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The first opposite party distributor entered appearance and denied the case of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The second opposite party the marketing company was absent and it was declared as ex parte. On an appreciation of the evidence on record the forum below passed the impugned order directing the opposite parties to pay to the complainant Rs. 3,000 with future interest at 14.5% per annum and Rs. 1,500 as compensation with cost of Rs. 1,000. Aggrieved by the impugned order the present appeal is preferred by the second opposite party, the Amway India Enterprises.

(2.) WHEN this appeal was taken up for final hearing there was no representation for the second respondent/first opposite party. The learned counsel for the appellant/second opposite party submitted his arguments based on the grounds urged in the memorandum of the present appeal. He canvassed for the position that no notice was served on the second opposite party in the complaint in OP No. 4 of 2002 and that the second opposite party/appellant did not get an opportunity to defend the case against it. Therefore, the appellant/second opposite party requested for remanding the matter for granting an opportunity to the second opposite party/appellant to substantiate its contentions in the case. The first respondent/complainant appeared in person and supported the findings and conclusions of the forum below. He requested for dismissal of the present appeal.

(3.) THE points that arise the consideration are: