Dtd.25.03.2024                                            RA/154/2023

O R D E R

              BY HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

1. This Review Application is filed U/s.50 of CPA, 2019 by Mr.Simha, the Petitioner/Complainant/Appellant in A/867/2023 and Respondent in A/811/2023. These matters are arising out of the award passed in District Commission in CC/262/2021 dated.31.03.2023. The review applicant in this application has sought to recall the order dtd.11.09.2023 passed by this Commission and further sought to dismiss the A/811/2023 filed by OP and allow his A/867/2023, not treating it as cross appeals.

2. The Commission heard the Review Applicant and counsel for Respondent. We perused the order dtd.11.09.2023, wherein Commission ordered to remand back the matter to the Commission below to consider the case afresh and dispose of the same on merits affording opportunity to both parties. It is this order sought to be reviewed on the ground when OP has lost his right to file version as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case between M/s.Daddys Builder Pvt., Ltd., vs. Manisha Bhargava on 11.02.2021, question of remand to afford opportunity to OP does not arise at all and would submit as on the date of order due to traffic congestion he was abstain from appearing before the Commission. On the contrary, learned counsel for OP submits  scope of review is very limited and the review application filed by the Review Applicant  beyond 30 days from 11.09.2023 is not maintainable could not be acceptable, since the Review Applicant submitted, order is passed on 11.09.2023 and he received the copy on 10.10.2023 and he has filed RA on 01.11.2023 which is well within 30 days, could be acceptable.

3. In view of rival contentions of the parties to this application, we have to bear in mind, in these matters what we have to follow would be the object of  Consumer Laws and the procedure to be followed being summary in nature, as such the commission in order to meet ends of justice to avoid further delay deems fit to  remand back the matter to the District Commission and in this regard, it is appropriate to extract what the commission has stated in para 8 of the order dtd.11.09.2023. …“though District Commission had accepted the deficiency in service, failed to award compensation towards the harm caused to the Complainant. The impugned order of the Commission below is a cryptic order, but not well reasoned order”. The Commission has taken into consideration of the said fact while observing so in the order and since the OP placed exparte before the District Commission, we also deems fit to remand back the matter to decide the complaint between parties in CC/262/2021 on merits affording opportunity to both parties. In our view on merits does not mean to say, OP had right to file his version and we are conscious of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case cited supra as to the time limit for filing of version starts commencing from the date of service of the notice and it is 30 + 15 days. Our object would be District Commission has to decide the case afresh keeping in mind the grievance of the complainant which he has made out in his appeal. Further, we are of the view even if OP in the consumer complaint has lost right to file version has not lost his right to participate in the complaint proceedings to be restored before the District Commission pursuant to the order dtd.11.09.2023. We have to bear in mind setting aside OP declaring an exparte and consequent upon such order allowing him to file version are two different things which cannot be merged and conclude OP has given a right to file version. In such view, even if OP has lost his right to file version, is at liberty to participate in the proceedings and place documents, since procedure to be followed being summary nature and such materials which would be placed would enable the District Commission to appreciate or re-appreciate the materials placed by Complainant to consider his grievance as to award of compensation.

4. The contention of applicant that his appeal cannot be treated  as cross appeal is unaccepted, since both appeals are arising out of the same award and they cannot be separated.
5. In the above such view of the matter, it would be just and proper to dispose of this RA. Accordingly we direct the parties to the complaint to appear before the District Commission in CC/262/2021 on 19.04.2024 without waiting for notice to be issued by the District Commission and the District Commission is directed to afford opportunity to both parties as observed in deciding the case as early as possible. Accordingly RA stands disposed of.
6. This order forms part and parcel of the order dtd.11.09.2023 passed in A/811 & 867/2023.

7. Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties to the petition.

Lady Member             Judicial Member              President     

*NS*