IN THE STATE COMMISSION :DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

                         Date of Decision: 16.05.2014

First Appeal – 401/2014

1. M/s. Agarwal Associates (Promoters) Ltd.,

   Through its concerned officers,

   Bharat Bhawan 10, New Rajdhani Enclave,

   Preet Vihar Metro Station,

   Vikas Marg, New Delhi-110092.

    

2. Smt. Uma Aggarwal,

   Managing Director,

   M/s. Agarwal Associates (Promoters)Ltd.,

   Bharat Bhawan 10, New Rajdhani Enclave,

   Preet Vihar Metro Station,

   Vikas Marg, New Delhi-110092.

    

3. Sh. Subhash Ahuja,

   M/s. Agarwal Associates (Promoters)Ltd.,

   Through its concerned officers,

   Bharat Bhawan 10, New Rajdhani Enclave,

   Preet Vihar Metro Station,

   Vikas Marg, New Delhi-110092.

   .....Appellants

   Vs

    

   Mr. Harbans Malik,

   21, Guru Tegh Bahadur Colony,

   Model Town, Panipat.

   .....Respondent

    

CORAM

Salma Noor, Presiding Member

N P Kaushik, Member (Judicial)

1.   Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment? 

2.   To be referred to the reporter or not?

SALMA NOOR, PRESIDING MEMBER

1.     In a complaint case bearing No.414/2012 Harbans Malik vs Aggarwal Associates filed before District Forum, East, Saini Enclave, Delhi, 10.1.2014 was fixed for appearance of the OP when the OP did not appear and the Forum ordered to proceed ex-parte against the OP. 

2.   That is what brings the Appellant/OP in appeal before    this Commission for setting aside the said ex-parte order. 

3.   We have heard Shri Amit Bhatia, Counsel for the Appellant in this appeal at the admission stage as there is no need to hear the respondent.

4.   The version of the appellant/OP for his non appearance on 10.1.2014 is that his wife’s relative expired on that day.  Therefore, he could not appear before the District Forum, hence the default occurred. There is no plausible reason to disbelieve or not to rely and act upon this version of the appellant.  Besides this, it has always been the consistent policy of the courts to   allow a little latitude, so that the parties may contest the case on merits, and an effective order may be passed.  Order dated 10.1.2014 passed by the District Forum against the appellant/OP is set aside, subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- which the OP will pay to the complainant on the next date, with the direction to the District Forum that they will allow the appellant/OP to file the WS and evidence and decide the case after hearing both the parties.  The appellant is directed to appear, through his counsel, before the District Forum, East, Saini Enclave, Delhi in this case on the date fixed before the Forum.

5.   Copy of this order be sent to District Forum, East, Saini Enclave, Delhi for information and to keep it on record and compliance.