Delhi

StateCommission

FA/545/2014

DENA BANK - Complainant(s)

Versus

MR. JAI NARAIN - Opp.Party(s)

28 Jul 2014

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION DELHI
Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
 
First Appeal No. FA/545/2014
(Arisen out of Order Dated in Case No. of District State Commission)
 
1. DENA BANK
SCOPE COMPLEX BRANCH, CORE No6, GROUND FLOOR, 7-LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI-110003.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. MR. JAI NARAIN
B-156, GALI No.5 CHATTARPUR EXTN. NEW DELHI-110074.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'ABLE MR. JUSTICE N.P KAUSHIK PRESIDING MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:
For the Respondent:
ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

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

 

                      Date of Decision:  28.7.2014

FA-545/2014

 

 

Dena Bank a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition &  Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Branch Office at Scope Complex Branch,  Core No.6, Ground Floor, 7, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110 003

 

 

 

     .........Appellant

VS

 

 

 

Sh. Jai Narain,

B-156, Gali No.5,

Chattarpur Extn.,

New Delhi-110 074

 

 

………...Respondent       

 

 

CORAM

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?

 

N P Kaushik, Member (Judicial)

 

 

1.     In a complaint case bearing No.399/2013 titled as  Jai Narain Vs. Dena Bank pending before District Forum-II, Qutab Institutional Area,  New Delhi, Opposite Parte (in short OP) had not put his appearance before the District Forum on 9.4.2014, hence the OP was ordered to be proceeded ex-party.  Application for setting aside the said order was also dismissed by the Forum vide order dated 2.5.2014 as the Forum has no jurisdiction to review its own order.

3.        In the present appeal before this Commission, OP /Appellant has prayed for setting aside the orders dated 9.42014 passed by the District Forum

4.         We have heard Shri Arun Agarwal, Counsel for the Appellant in this appeal at the admission stage itself

5.         The version of the appellant/OP for non-appearance before the Forum is that due to heavy traffic jam he could not reach the Forum in time and the case was proceeded ex-parte against him due to non appearance. 

6.         We do not find any reason or not believing the version of the appellant/OP. Policy of law is not to stifle a contest.  In such circumstances, a lenient view is required to be taken so as to allow the OP to contest the case.  Order dated 9.4.2014 passed by the District Forum against the appellant/OP is set aside, subject to payment of cost of Rs.2,000/- 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/OP is directed to appear, through his counsel, before the District Forum-II, Qutab Institutional Area,  New Delhi in this case on the date fixed.

7.         Copy of this order be sent to District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi for information and to keep it on record and compliance and a copy of this order be transmitted to both the parties.

                                                                                                                                          

              

 
 
[HON'ABLE MR. JUSTICE N.P KAUSHIK]
PRESIDING MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.