Haryana

StateCommission

RP/82/2016

STATE BANK OF INDIA - Complainant(s)

Versus

GURTEJ SINGH - Opp.Party(s)

SUMIT NARANG

24 Oct 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

Revision Petition No.    82 of 2016

Date of Institution:       04.10.2016

Date of Decision:         24.10.2016

 

State Bank of India, ADB Branch, Sirsa through it’s Chief Manager.

 

…….Petitioner-opposite party

 

Versus

 

Shri Gurtej Singh son of Shri Gurbax Singh, resident of Village Mallewala, Tehsil & District Sirsa.

 

……Respondent-complainant

 

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

                   Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                         

 

Present:     Mr. Sumit Narang, Advocate for the petitioner.

                  

                            

O R D E R

 

 

 NAWAB SINGH J, (ORAL)

 

          State Bank of India, Sirsa (for short ‘SBI’) is in revision against the order dated September 06^th, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sirsa (for short ‘District Forum’), whereby, petitioner was proceeded ex parte.

2.      Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that Bank Authorities wrongly noted the date September 07^th, 2016 instead of September 06^th, 2016 due to which nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner and the petitioner was proceeded ex parte. The next date of hearing before the District Forum is November 10^th, 2016 for recording the evidence of the complainant.

3.      Be that as it may and without delving deeper, this Commission is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if the impugned order is set aside and opportunity is granted to the petitioner to file written version and contest the complaint.  For whatever inconvenience has been caused to the other side suitable costs shall be the remedy.

4.      Accordingly, this revision petition is accepted and the impugned order is set aside subject to the conditional cost of Rs.3000/- which is to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent-complainant, on the date fixed, before the District Forum. The petitioner is accorded opportunity to file written version and join the proceedings.

5.      This revision petition is disposed of without issuing notice to the respondent with a view to impart substantive justice to the parties and to save the huge expenses, which may be incurred by the respondent as also in order to avoid unnecessary delay in adjudication of the matter.  In this regard, reliance can be placed on a Division Bench Judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court rendered in Batala Machine Tools Workshop Cooperative Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur (CWP No.9563 of 2002) decided on June 27^th, 2002.

6.      The petitioner is directed to appear before the District Forum, on November 10^th, 2016, the date already fixed.

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

  

Announced 24.10.2016

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

D.R.