Delhi

StateCommission

RP/227/2016

AMERICAN EXPRESS BANKING CORP. - Complainant(s)

Versus

ABAN EXIN PVT. LTD.& ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

SHAILENDRA BHATNAGAR

19 Oct 2016

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

 

Date of Decision: 19.10.2016

 

 

Revision Petition No.227/2016

(Arising out of the order dated 09.05.2016 passed in Complaint Case No.187/2016 by the District Consumer Redressal Forum (South West), Sheikh Sarai, New Delhi)

 

 

In the matter of:

 

 

American Express Banking Corp.

Metropolitan Saket, 7^th Floor,

Office Block, District Centre, Saket,

New Delhi

 

ALSO AT:

Cyber City, Tower-C,

DLF Building No.8,

Sector-25, DLF City, Phase-II,

Gurgaon – 122002. Haryana.

           ....Appellant

 

Versus

 

1.    Aban Exin Pvt. Ltd.,

       Through its Director,

       D-60/2, Basement East of Kailash,

       New Delhi.

 

2.    Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.,

       C-48, Okhla Industrial Area Phase-II,

       New Delhi.

 

3.    Vodafone India Ltd.,

       Peninsula Corporate Bank,

       Ganpatrao Kadam Marg,

       Lower Parel, Mumbai.

 

4.    Mr. Morish Shukla,

       DGM, Nodal Officer,

       A-19, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area,

       Mathura Road, New Delhi.

....Respondents

 

CORAM

Justice Veena Birbal, President.

Ms. Salma Noor, Member.

 

1. Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?

 

2. To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President

 

1. This is a petition under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (in short ‘the Act’) where prayer is made for setting aside the order dated 09.05.2016 passed by the District Forum-VII in CC No.187/2016, whereby the petitioner/ OP No.4 has been proceeded ex-parte.
2. The impugned order reads as under:

           “09.05.2016

None for Comp.

Pr. counsel for OP I, II and III an filed vakalatnama and also received copy of complaint.

 

None  for OP-IV

 

Fixed 10.06.16 for reply by OP No.I, II and III and report of Dasti notice qua OP –IV by Comp.

 

Later on: Pr. counsel for Comp. Filed report of Dasti Notice qua OP –IV. Presence of OP IV be awaited till 2PM. Counsel for comp. seeks short adjournment for preponment of the date for deciding interim prayer, which is part of the complaint. As he has spoken Ms. Sumedha telephonically for OP IV, II and III who consented for the same. Hence fixed 12.5.16 for presence of both parties for reply/arguments on interim prayer at 12.30 PM. The date 10.6.16 is cancelled.

 

Case is filled out at 2.25 PM. None appeared for OP IV and hence OP IV is proceed exparte. Put up on the date fixed 12.5.16.

 

 

3. Reasoning given as to why petitioner/OP No.4 did not appear before the Ld. District Forum has been given as under:

          

“3.   That the reason for non-appearance of the petitioner on 09.05.2016 was that the summons of the court was received at the registered office of the petitioner at New Delhi which was in turn sent to correspondence unit of the petitioner at the corporate office of the petitioner at Gurgaon, Haryana and the said summons were received by the legal department of the petitioner at Gurgaon only on 13.05.2016 by which the date, the date of hearing i.e. 09.05.2016 had already gone by.

 

4.     That thereafter the petitioner engaged the present advocates to carry out the inspection of the court record and found the ex-parte order against the petitioner.

 

4. Counsel for the respondent No.1/complainant initially opposed the petition and stated that the petitioner/OP No.4 is trying to delay the matter unnecessarily. However, after some arguments, he states that to cut short further delay in the matter and to have decision on merits, he has no objection if the impugned order is set aside subject to payment of costs and the petitioner/OP No.4 is allowed to participate in the proceedings.
5. In view of the reasoning given as well as no objection given on behalf of the respondent No.1/complainant, we accept this petition and set aside the impugned order dated 09.05.2016 subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- to respondent No.1/complainant.
6. It is stated that the petitioner/OP No.4 has already filed written statement before the Ld. District Forum. The District Forum shall taken the same on record on payment of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent No.1/complainant and proceed further in the matter in accordance with law.
7. It is stated that the next date before the District Forum is 24.10.2016. On the said the petitioner/OP No.4 shall pay the costs to the respondent No.1/Complainant. 
8. Copy of this order be given to the parties and be also sent to the District Forum-VII, New Delhi for information.

           File be consigned to Record Room.