IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI - 3.

Present: Hon’ble Thiru Justice R.SUBBIAH  ... PRESIDENT

Revision Petition No.109 of 2023

(Against the Order dated 11.10.2021 passed in C.C. No.77/2021 on the file of the DCDRC, Chennai (North))

                                                     Orders, dated:07.11.2023

M/s. VGN Property Developers Pvt. Ltd.,

Represented by its Authorized Signatory,

No.153, Wallace Garden, 2^nd Street,

Nungambakkam,

Chennai – 600 006.       … Revision Petitioner / 2^nd Opposite party.

- Versus –

1. Dr. S. Arunkumar,

S/o. Mr. Selvarayar,

No.3, Eswari Nagar Extension,

East Tambaram,

Chennai – 600 059.                         … 1^st Respondent /Complainant. 

2. M/s. Azetc Private Properties Ltd.,

Represented by its Authorized Signatory,

No.153, Wallace Garden, 2^nd Street,

Nungambakkam,

Chennai – 600 006.           ... 2^nd Respondent / 1^st Opposite party.

For Rev. Petitioner / 2^nd Opposite party  : M/s. K. Harishankar

For 1^st Respondent /Complainant          : M/s. S.S. Rajesh 

2^nd Respondent / 1^st Opposite party       : Given up

     This Revision Petition is listed today and, after hearing the arguments of the counsel for the Revision Petitioner and 1^st respondent and upon perusing the materials on record, this Commission passes the following:-

O R D E R

R.Subbiah, J. – President.   (Open Court)

                This Revision Petition is filed against the Order, dated 11.10.2021 passed by the DCDRC, Chennai (North) in C.C. No.77/2021, whereby, the District Commission has set the Revision Petitioner herein/ 2^nd Opposite party exparte for non-appearance before the District Commission and consequently, adjourned the Case to 06.12.2021 for filing proof affidavit of the complainant.

2.     Heard the Revision Petitioner / 2^nd  Opposite party and 1^st respondent / complainant. 

3.     This Revision Petitioner / 2^nd Opposite party was set exparte for non-appearance before the District Commission.  Hence, the Revision Petition.  When the matter had come up before this Commission, the Learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner herein/ 2^nd Opposite Party submitted that the erstwhile legal officer of the Revision Petitioner’s company had resigned his job and the relevant documents were misplaced and appropriate instructions pertaining to the case could not be given to the Counsel in time.  In the meantime, on 11.10.2021, the Revision Petitioner / 2^nd opposite party was set exparte. The non-appearance of the Revision Petitioner / 2^nd Opposite party before the District Commission is neither wilful nor wanton.   Thus, he prays before this Commission for setting aside the exparte order dated:11.10.2021.  When that being the position, we are of the opinion that keeping the Revision Petition filed by the 2^nd opposite party pending will further delay the matter.   Hence, irrespective of the reasons assigned by the Revision Petitioner / 2^nd Opposite party, in the interests of justice, we are inclined to allow this Revision Petition by setting aside the impugned order so that, the Revision Petitioner will have a chance of contesting the case on merits.

4. In the result, the Revision Petition is allowed and the impugned order, dated 11.10.2021 passed in C.C. No.77/2021 by the DCDRC, Chennai (North) in setting the Revision Petitioner / 2^nd  Opposite party exparte is set aside, and the 2^nd Opposite Party shall file his Vakalath, Version, Proof Affidavit and the documents/exhibits on their side, if any, in C.C. No.77/2021 on the next date of hearing without fail, whereupon, the District Commission shall proceed with the case in accordance with law, for its early disposal.

                                                                                R.SUBBIAH, J.

                                                                                   PRESIDENT.

KIR/TNSCDRC/Chennai/Orders/ November/2023.