KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL No.674/2018

JUDGEMENT DATED : 16.12.2024

(Against the order in C.C.No.239/2018 on the file of DCDRC, Malappuram)

PRESENT:

APPELLANTS:

(by Authorised Representative R.P. Sandeep)

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

(by Adv. Deepesh A.S.)

JUDGEMENT

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR  :  PRESIDENT

          The appellants are the opposite parties in C.C.No.239/2018 on the files of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Malappuram (for short ‘the District Commission’).  The complainant before the District Commission is the respondent herein. 

          2.       The complainant filed a complaint against the appellants alleging deficiency in service in connection with the delivery of a registered speed post article.  Notice was issued to the opposite parties on 04.08.2018.  The notice was served on the opposite parties.  However, since the opposite parties were not present before the District Commission, the opposite parties were set ex-parte by the District Commission and thereafter the District Commission passed the order impugned directing the opposite parties to deliver all the letters addressed to the complainant or his authorised agent without causing any delay.  It was further directed that the opposite parties shall pay Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) as compensation and Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) as costs.  Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal has been filed.

3.       Service is complete.  However, there is no appearance for the respondent.

4.       Heard the representative of the appellants. 

5.  It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants could not attend the District Commission on 17.08.2018, when the case was posted for the appearance, on the reason that the road transport system to Malappuram was closed due to flood.  Thereafter, a letter was sent to the District Commission seeking for extension of time.  On an enquiry about the status of the case, it was revealed that the hearing scheduled on 17.08.2018 was cancelled due to flood situation at Malappuram and the case was posted to 28.08.2018.  On that day, the appellants were set ex-parte.  Thereafter, the order impugned was passed.

6.  It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that it was due to the flood that the appellants could not reach the District Commission even after the receipt of the notice and in the said circumstances, the learned counsel for the appellants has sought for granting one more opportunity to the appellants to contest the matter on merits. The above submission of the learned counsel for the appellants finds place in the memorandum of appeal also.

7.  It appears from the facts and circumstances of the case, including the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants, we are of the view that it is only just and proper to grant one more opportunity to the appellants to contest the matter on merits. 

In the result, this appeal stands allowed, setting aside the order passed by the District Commission in C.C.No.239/2018 and the case is remitted to the District Commission with a direction to the District Commission to proceed with the complaint in accordance with law, affording reasonable opportunity to both sides to adduce evidence, untrammelled by any of the observations in the order impugned.

Needless to state that the opposite parties shall be entitled to file version within 45 days from the date of receipt of notice, excluding the period from the date of order impugned to the date of receipt of judgement of this Commission.  The proceedings of the complaint shall stand relegated to the stage prior to the setting of the opposite parties ex-parte.

SL