Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

RP/19/37

TVS MOTOR CO.LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

BASANT LAL YADAV AND ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

SH. ASADULLAH KHAN

15 Nov 2019

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

                              

                                    REVISION PETITION NO. 37 OF 2019

(Arising out of order dated 07.02.2019 passed in C.C.No.640/2018 by District Forum, Bhopal)

 

TVS MOTOR COMPANY LIMITED.                                                                      …          PETITIONER

 

Versus

                 

BASANTLAL YADAV & ORS.                                                                                …         RESPONDENTS.

 

BEFORE:

 

                  HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHANTANU S. KEMKAR     :      PRESIDENT

                  HON’BLE SHRI S. S. BANSAL                                       :      MEMBER                                  

 

                                      O R D E R

 

15.11.2019

 

           Shri Asad Ullah Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner.

            None for the respondents.

 

As per Shri Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar :                       

            Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the impugned order and record.

2.                     On going through the impugned order dated 07.02.2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bhopal (For short ‘Forum’) in C.C.No.640/2018, we find that the Forum has proceeded ex-parte against the petitioner/opposite party no.2 presuming service of notice as the notice sent to the petitioner was not receive back.

3.                     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact the notice was not served on the petitioner on the date when the matter was taken by the Forum.  In revision memo these facts have been demonstrated. Having gone through the same and having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of a view that the impugned order deserves to be set-aside and the petitioner deserves to be granted an opportunity to file reply to the complaint. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner submits that he has not received copy of the complaint and as such the Forum may be directed to instruct the complainant to provide copy of complaint to petitioner.

4.                     Accordingly, we dispose of this revision by setting aside the impugned order and direct the Forum to instruct complainant to provide copy of complaint to counsel for petitioner/opposite party no.2 within a week from the date of appearance of parties.  On receipt of copy of the complaint, the petitioner/opposite party no.2 shall file reply within three weeks.

-2-

5.                     The Forum shall then proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

6.                     Parties to appear before the Forum on 09.12.2019.

 

             (Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar)                  (S. S. Bansal)           

                            President                                        Member