Haryana

StateCommission

RP/78/2015

M/s Piyush Buildwell India Limited - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mrs. Manjeet Kaur - Opp.Party(s)

15 Oct 2015

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA

 

                                                Revision Petition No.   78 of 2015

                                                Date of Institution:       30.09.2015

                                                Date of Decision:         15.10.2015

  

1.      M/s Piyush Buildwell India Limited, Piyush Heights, Sector 89, Faridabad through its Managing Director/ Directors/ Principal Officer/Authorized Signatory.

 

2.      M/s Piyush Buildwell India Limited, A-16/B-1, Mohan Co. Op. Industrial Estate Main Mathura Road, New Delhi – 110044, through its Managing Director/Directors/Principal Officer/Authorized Signatory.

Petitioners-Opposite Parties

Versus

 

Mrs. Manjeet Kaur wife of Sardar Iqbal Singh, resident of House No.1846, Gali No.10, Gobindpuri Extension, New Delhi – 110019.

Respondent-Complainant

 

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

                   Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                   Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member.

 

Present :    Sh. Tanmoy Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners.

 

 

O R D E R

 

 

NAWAB SINGH J, (ORAL)

 

                    The instant revision petition has been filed by M/s Piyush Buildwell India Limited and another-opposite parties (petitioners) against the order dated August 14^th, 2015 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short ‘District Forum), Faridabad, whereby, their defence was struck off for non-filing of reply.

2.                Learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that the impugned order be set aside and opportunity be given to the petitioners to file reply.  The next date of hearing before the District Forum is November 02^nd, 2015.

3.                Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shaikh Salim Haiji Abdul Khayumsab versus Kumar and others, 2005 (4), RCR (Civil), 823, observed that the object is to expedite the hearing and not to scuttle the same. While justice delayed may amount to justice denied, justice hurried may in some cases amount to justice buried.  No party should ordinarily be denied the opportunity of participating in the process of justice dispensation.  Thus, this revision petition is allowed and the order dated August 14^th, 2015 is set-aside subject to conditional cost of Rs.3,000/- to be paid to the complainant. Consequently, the petitioners are accorded opportunity to file reply on the date fixed before the District Forum, that is, November 02^nd, 2015.

4.                This 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 High Court of Punjab and Haryana Court rendered in Batala Machine Tools Workshop Cooperative vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur (CWP No. 9563 of 2002) decided on June 27th, 2002.

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

 

October 15th, 2015

Diwan Singh Chauhan Member

B.M.Bedi Judicial Member

Nawab Singh President

U.K