Haryana

StateCommission

A/298/2016

NARANG CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCIERS PVT.LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

GEE VARGHESE GEORGE - Opp.Party(s)

ASHISH KUMAR

12 Aug 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                               

 

First Appeal No  :           298 of 2016

Date of Institution:          11.04.2016

Date of Decision :           12.08.2016

 

 

M/s Narang Construction and Financiers Private Limited, having registered office at SD-65, Pitampura, Delhi through its Director Arun Rathee.

                                      Appellant-Opposite Party

Versus

 

 

Gee Varghese George son of late Kochumman George, resident of Flat No.C-141, Max Heights, Sector 62, Kundli, Tehsil and District Sonepat.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

 

                                                                                                                  

Present:               Shri Ashish Kumar, Advocate for appellant.

Shri Akash Juneja, Advocate for the respondent.

 

 

O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

M/s Narang Construction and Financiers Private Limited-opposite party has challenged the correctness and legality of the order dated February 26^th, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sonepat (for short ‘District Forum’) whereby complaint filed by Gee Varghese George was allowed.

2.      Learned counsel for the appellant has urged that the appellant was never served upon; proceeded ex parte before the District Forum and ex parte order was passed against it. So, an opportunity be granted to contest the complaint  on merits. 

3.      Perusal of record reveals that by order dated January 11^th, 2016, the District Forum proceeded ex parte against the appellant, as notice of the complaint not received back served or unserved and more than one month had passed.  Thus, it becomes clear that on the presumption of service, the District Forum proceeded ex parte against the appellant.  Since the appellant was proceeded ex parte before the District Forum and as such could not contest the complaint on merits, it would be in the interest of justice to give opportunity to the appellant to contest the complaint on merits. Otherwise too, learned counsel for the respondent has fairly stated that he has no objection in granting opportunity to the appellant to file reply and contest the complaint.

4.      In view of above, the appeal is accepted and the impugned order is set aside. The appellant is accorded opportunity to join the proceedings and parties shall be entitled to lead evidence etc. The case is remitted to the District Forum with the direction to decide the complaint afresh expeditiously.

5.       The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum on September 09^th, 2016.

6.      Copy of this order be sent to the District Forum.

7.      The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

 

Announced: 12.08.2016

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

 

U.K