Haryana

StateCommission

RP/33/2017

SUZUKI MOTORCYECLE INDIA LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

MR.SUNNY - Opp.Party(s)

ARUN KUMAR

09 May 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

 

                                                 

Revision Petition No.    33 of 2017

Date of Institution:       27.03.2017

Date of Decision:         09.05.2017

 

 

Suzuki Motorcycle India Private Limited, through its authorized representative with its registered office at 2^nd Floor, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi.

 

…….Petitioner-Opposite Party No.2.

 

Versus

 

1.      Mr. Sunny son of Om Prakash, resident of Village Keorak, Tehsil and District Kaithal, Haryana.

 

……Respondent No.1-Complainant

 

2.      Naaz Autos Private Limited, through its Managing Director, Ambala Road, Kaithal, District Kaithal, Haryana.

 

……Respondent No.2-Opposite Party No.1

 

 

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

                   Mr. Balbir Singh, Judicial Member.

 

Present:     Shri Arun Kumar, counsel for the petitioner-opposite party No.2.

 

O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J, (ORAL)

 

The instant revision petition has been filed by Suzuki Motorcycle India Private Limited-opposite party No.2 against the orders dated November 29^th, 2016 & February 28^th, 2017  passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kaithal (for short ‘District Forum’) whereby the petitioner was proceeded ex parte and it’s application for setting aside ex parte order was dismissed respectively.   

2.      Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the petitioner received the notice but due to some reasons, nobody could appear before the District Forum. He further urged that an opportunity be granted to the petitioner to file written version and contest the complaint. The next date of hearing before the District Forum is May 16^th, 2017 for arguments.

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 orders are 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 orders dated November 29^th, 2016 & February 28^th, 2017 are set aside subject to the conditional cost of Rs.5,000/- which is to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent No.1-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 respondents with a view to impart substantive justice to the parties and to save the huge expenses, which may be incurred by the respondents 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 May 16^th, 2017, the date already fixed.

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

                                                                sd/-                                                   sd/-

Announced 09.05.2017

(Balbir Singh) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

D.R.