Delhi

StateCommission

A/640/2014

ICICI BANK LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

BINOY NAG CHOUDHARY - Opp.Party(s)

07 Jul 2015

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION DELHI
Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
 
First Appeal No. A/640/2014
(Arisen out of Order Dated 07/05/2014 in Case No. CC/484/2006 of District South II)
 
1. ICICI BANK LTD.
2nd FLOOR, ICICI BANK TOWERS, NBCC PLACE, BHISHMA PITAMAH MARG, NEW DELHI-110003.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. BINOY NAG CHOUDHARY
B-329, CHITTARANJAN PARK, NEW DELHI-110019.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRESIDENT
 HONABLE MRS. Salma Noor MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:
For the Respondent:
ORDER

FA-640/14

07.07.2015

Present:        Sh. Hemant Gupta, Counsel for the Appellant.

                   Sh. Abhilash Shukla, Counsel for the Respondent.

 

 

The grievance of the appellant bank is that the impugned order dated 07.05.2014 is an ex-parte order. It is submitted that the District Forum has decided the complaint case without giving an opportunity to the appellant/OP of filing its evidence and making submissions at the time of final hearing.

        Ld. counsel for the appellant bank has submitted that the impugned order has serious consequences upon the appellant. It is submitted that a great prejudice shall be caused to the appellant/OP if the ex-parte order dated 07.05.2014 is not set aside whereas no prejudice shall be caused to the respondent/complainant if impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back for decided afresh after giving opportunity to the appellant/bank to contest the case on merits as respondent/complainant will get opportunity to rebut the stand of appellant/OP. It is submitted that for the delay caused, respondent/complainant can be compensated with costs.

        Ld. Counsel for the respondent/complainant has submitted that the written statement was filed on behalf of the appellant. Thereafter, the complainant had also filed the evidence by way of affidavit but appellant/OP stopped appearing in the matter and for a substantial period the counsel for the appellant/OP did not appear and substantial delay has been caused in the matter and respondent has been unnecessarily dragged in this Commission also.

 However, after some arguments, Ld. counsel for the respondent/complainant has submitted that for the effective disposal of the case on merits, respondent has no objection if the respondents is compensated for the delay caused and appellant/OP be given chance to contest the case on merits.

        Keeping in mind in the interest of justice and for effectinve disposal of the case on merits as well as no objection given by the respondent/OP, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order, subject to costs of Rs. 8000/-.

        The parties shall appear before the District Forum on 28.08.2015. On the said date the appellant/OP shall pay the costs to the respondent/complainant. The appellant/OP shall also file its evidence by way of affidavit on the said date. Thereafter, the District Forum shall proceed further in accordance with law.

        A copy of this order as per statutory requirements be sent to the parties. A copy of the same be also sent to concerned District Forum.

        FDR, if any, deposited by the appellant be released in his favour as per rules.

        File be consigned to record room.

 

(Justice Veena Birbal)

President

 

 

(Salma Noor)

Member

 

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONABLE MRS. Salma Noor]
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.