Delhi

StateCommission

FA/1154/2013

ANIL KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

BABU SAHEB AMBEDKAR INSTT. - Opp.Party(s)

04 Sep 2014

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION DELHI
Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
 
First Appeal No. FA/1154/2013
(Arisen out of Order Dated in Case No. of District State Commission)
 
1. ANIL KUMAR
103, RAF CAMP, WAZIRABAD, DELHI.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. BABU SAHEB AMBEDKAR INSTT.
PLOT No 13-B, BHUDELA DEVELOPMENT AREA, VIKASPURI, N.D.-110018.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRESIDENT
 HONABLE MRS. Salma Noor MEMBER
 HON'ABLE MR. JUSTICE N.P KAUSHIK MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:
For the Respondent:
ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

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

 

           Date of decision: 04.09.2014

First Appeal- 1154/2013

Anil Kumar

103, Raf Camp,

Wazirabad, Delhi

Contact No. 9015753122                                                  ....Appellant

 

VERSUS

Baba Saheb Ambedkar Institute of technology

Plot No. 13-B, Bhudela Development Area

Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018

Contact No. 011-28532901                                             …….Respondent

 

CORAM

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President

Salma Noor, Member

N P 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, Member

 

 

1)           In a complaint case bearing no. 889/12, Anil Kumar Vs Baba Shaheb Ambedkar Institute, filed before District Forum- III, Janakpuri New Delhi the Complainant absented himself on 01.08.2013, the date fixed for hearing, and the Forum dismissed the complaint in complainant’s default.

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

3)       We have heard, Complainant in person in this appeal at the admission stage.

4)          The version of the Complainant appellant for his non appearance on 01.08.2013 before the Forum is that the complainant was attending his mother’s operation in Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital and he was in the hospital since 30.08.2013 and unfortunately his mother got expired on 02.09.2013 therefore he could not attend the case which is pending in your court. To support his version complainant filed affidavit. There is no plausible reason not to rely and not to Act upon this version of the appellant. It has never been the policy of the law to stifle to contest and wherever possible, under the circumstances a lenient view in this regard has been recommended, so that the parities may have an opportunity to present their case before the Forum, so that the matter may be decided on merit. We therefore, allow the appeal setting aside the dismissal orders dt. 01.08.2013 in question, and remand the case back to District Forum- III, Janakpuri New Delhi with a direction to restore the complaint on its original number, and to further proceed in the case according to law, the Appellant Complainant is directed to appear before the District Forum- III, Janakpuri New Delhi on 15.10.2014.  

5)              A copy of this order be sent to District Forum- III, Janakpuri New Delhi to keep it on complaint file and for compliance. 

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONABLE MRS. Salma Noor]
MEMBER
 
[HON'ABLE MR. JUSTICE N.P KAUSHIK]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.