Haryana

StateCommission

RP/65/2016

BAJAJ FINANCE LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

BABLU KUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

YOGESH GUPTA

18 Aug 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

Revision Petition No  :    65 of 2016

Date of Institution:          29.07.2016

Date of Decision :           18.08.2016

Bajaj Finance Limited through its Manager, Sector 14, Gurgaon, District Gurgaon, Haryana.

                                      Petitioner-Opposite Party No.2

Versus

 

1.      Bablu Kumar s/o Sh. Meghnath, Resident of House No.326/4, Firoz Gandhi Colony, Number-2, Gurgaon, Haryana.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

2.      Bansal Electronics Private Limited through its Manager, 331/2, M.G. Road, Opposite S.B.I. Bank, Near Dev Cinema, Gurgaon, Haryana.

Performa Respondent/Opposite Party No.1

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                                                                                                                  

Present:               Shri Yogesh Gupta, Advocate for Petitioner.

 

O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

Bajaj Finance Limited-Opposite Party No.2 is in revision against the order March 14^th, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Gurgaon (for short ‘the District Forum’), whereby it was proceeded exparte.

2.      Bablu Kumar– complainant/respondent No.1, filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, before the District Forum alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

3.      Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the petitioner had issued instructions to its counsel to appear before the District Forum but the said instructions were communicated to the counsel after the date fixed, that is, March 14^th, 2016 and the petitioner was proceeded exparte. So, an opportunity be granted to the petitioner to file reply and contest the complaint. The next date of hearing is fixed August 24^th, 2016 for recording evidence of the complainant.

4.      Justice is the goal of jurisprudence. No party should ordinarily be denied the opportunity of participating in the process of justice dispensation. It is always better to decide the matter on merits. This Commission is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if an opportunity is granted to the petitioner to file reply and contest the complaint.

5.      Accordingly, this revision petition is accepted and the order dated March 14^th, 2016 is set aside.  The petitioner is accorded opportunity to file reply and join the proceedings.

6.      Following Batala Machine Tools Workshop Cooperative Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur(CWP No.9563 of 2002) decided on June 27^th, 2002 passed by a Division Bench of Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, this revision petition is disposed of without issuing notice to the respondent with a view to impart substantive justice to the parties and to save the huge expenses, which may be incurred by the respondent as also in order to avoid unnecessary delay in adjudication of the matter.

7.      The petitioner is directed to appear before the District Forum, Gurgaon, on August 24^th, 2016, the date fixed.

8.      Copy of this order be sent to the District Forum.

 

Announced: 18.08.2016

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

 

CL