IN THE STATE COMMISSION :DELHI

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

                                     Date of Decision: 12.08.2014

First Appeal – 993/2013

Dr. Saurabh Moda,

Sr. Consultant,

C-5/29, SDA Main IIT Gate,

New Delhi-110016.

………Appellant

Vs

1. Ex-Sub Amar Singh,

S/o Late Shri Chajju Ram,

R/o Vill – Paiga,

PO & Distt – Mohindergarh (HR),

At present in New Delhi.

1. Orthonova Hospital,

C-5/29, SDA, Main IIT Gate,

New Delhi-110016.

1. Dr. H.V. Nagar,

C-5/29, SDA Main IIT Gate,

New Delhi-110016.

                                                ……..Respondents

CORAM

Salma Noor, Presiding Member

NP Kaushik, Member(Judicial)

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

2.   To be referred to the reporter or not?

SALMA NOOR, PRESIDING MEMBER

1.     In a complaint case bearing No.155/2010 Amar Singh vs Orthonova Hospital filed before District Forum-II, Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi 25.10.2011 was fixed for filing written statement by the OP/Appellant, but due to non-appearance, the Forum proceeded ex-parte. 

2.      That is what brings the Appellant/OP in appeal before this Commission.

3.     We have heard Shri S.K. Roy, Counsel for the Appellant at the admission stage as there is no need to hear the Respondent.

4.      The version of the Appellant/OP for his non-appearance on the date fixed is that the notice was not served upon.  Therefore, he could not appear and the District Forum proceeded ex-parte against him.  In support of his contention, Appellant has filed an affidavit. There is no plausible reason not to rely and not to act upon this version of the appellant. Besides that it has never been the policy of law to stifle a contest and wherever possible, under the circumstances a lenient view in this regard has been recommended, so that the parties may have an opportunity to present their case before the Forum and the matter may be decided on merit. We therefore, allow the appeal setting aside the ex-parte orders dated 25.10.11 in question, subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- which the OP will pay to the complainant on the next date.  The case is remanded back to the District Forum-II, Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi with the direction that they will allow the Appellant/OP to file the written statement and decide the case after hearing both the parties. The Appellant/OP is directed to appear before the District Forum-II, Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi on the date fixed.

5.   A copy of this order be sent to District Forum-II, Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi to keep it on complaint file and for compliance.