BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT PUDUCHERRY

THURSDAY, the 6^th day of March, 2014

First Appeal No.5/2013

M/s L.G.Electronics India Pvt. Ltd.,

Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,

Plot No.A-5, Mide Rangangaon,

Shrur, Pune, Maharashtra                      …………                                  Appellant/O.P.2

                                                                            Vs.

1. K.Vijayakumar, S/o Krishnaraj,

    No.5, Iswarya Nagar, Vazudavur Road,

    (Near Ponlait Dairy), Puducherry.        ………….                 Respondent/Complainant

2. M/s Univercell Communications Pvt. Ltd.,

    Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,

    No.213, S.V. Patel Salai, Puducherry.  …………..                     Respondent/O.P.1

(On appeal against the order passed by the District Forum, Puducherry in Consumer Complaint No.46 of 2008, dated 06.09.2010)

Consumer Complaint No. 46 of 2008

K.Vijayakumar, S/o Krishnaraj,

No.5, Iswarya Nagar, Vazudavur Road,

(Near Ponlait Dairy), Puducherry.            ………….                                     Complainant

                                                                               Vs.

1. M/s Univercell Communications Pvt. Ltd.,

    Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,

    No.213, S.V. Patel Salai, Puducherry.

2. M/s L.G.Electronics India Pvt. Ltd.,

    Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,

    Plot No.A-5, Mide Rangangaon,

    Shrur, Pune, Maharashtra                      …………                             Opposite Parties

BEFORE:

HON’BLE THIRU JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN

PRESIDENT

TMT.K.K.RITHA,

MEMBER

THIRU K.ELUMALAI,

MEMBER

FOR APPELLANT/O.P.No.2:

Tvl. M.Lakshmi Narasimhan,

S.Vimal, P.Sakthi

Advocates, Puducherry.

FOR RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

Tvl. S.Balaji and S.Bremkumar,

Advocates, Puducherry

FOR RESPONDENT/O.P.No.1:

Exparte

O  R  D  E  R

(By Hon’ble Justice President)

            This appeal is directed against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Puducherry in Consumer Complaint No.46/2008, dated 06.09.2010.

            2. This appeal is preferred by the 2^nd opposite party in the complaint against the said order of the District Forum.

            3. The 1^st respondent being the complainant before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Puducherry has filed the complaint claiming a sum of Rs.1,800/- towards cost of cellphone and a sum of Rs.50,000/-towards mental agony and damages.  When the matter was listed before the District Forum, Puducherry, only the complainant has appeared and the opposite parties did not appear.  The complainant was examined as CW1 and filed proof-affidavit and through him Exs.C1 to C5 were marked. The District Forum found that the claim was proved and allowed the complaint. The said order, as already stated, is under challenge in the present appeal.

            4. We are unable to give a seal of approval to the order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Puducherry. The reason being that even if the opposite parties are set exparte and the claimant filed proof-affidavit along with documents, it is expected that the documents have to be considered in proper perspective before giving a finding that the complainant's claim was proved.  But, unfortunately, the District Forum having entertained the proof-affidavit and the documents on the complainant's side, did not discuss about the documents and has not whispered anything as to why the complainant's claim has to be allowed.  Without discussing about the documents, the District Forum found that the complainant's claim was proved.  In our considered view, it is not in proper perspective. As already stated, the District Forum has come to the conclusion that the claim of the complaint is proved without analyzing the documents and without giving a finding on the basis of the documents so filed.

            5. In view of the above reasons, we are of the considered view that the order of the District Forum in C.C.46/2008, dated 06.09.2010 is liable to be set aside.

            6. In fine, the appeal stands allowed. We remit the matter to District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Puducherry to hear the matter afresh. It is open to the opposite parties including the appellant herein, who is absent, to file the reply version and get on the matter. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Puducherry is directed to dispose the matter on merits after giving notice to the opposite parties to file their reply version.  If the opposite parties failed to respond and file their reply version and proceed with the matter further, it is open to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Puducherry to consider the documents filed by the complainant and thereafter decide the matter on merits.

Dated this the 6^th day of March, 2014

(Justice K.VENKATARAMAN)

PRESIDENT

(K.K.RITHA)

MEMBER

(K.ELUMALAI)

MEMBER