M/s. Arsh Castings (P) Ltd. Respondent in First Appeal No.561/2003 and Appellant in First Appeal No.646/2003, has filed this Review Application seeking review of the Order dated 17th January, 2008 passed by this Commission in the First Appeals. By a common order dated 17th January, 2008 this Commission has allowed the First Appeal No.561/2003 filed by the H.P. State Electricity Board, set aside the impugned order and dismissed the complaint and accordingly dismissed the First Appeal No.646 of 2003 filed by M/s. Arsh Castings Pvt. Ltd. M/s. Arsh Castings Pvt. Ltd., inter alia has filed the Review Application on the ground that while passing the order dated 17.1.2008 the third Bench of this Commission was not informed by the counsel for the H.P. State Electricity Board that the second Bench of this Commission while deciding First Appeal No.562/2003 and First Appeal No.645/2003 by a common order dated 15.4.2005 had already settled the controversy between the parties to the dispute. We have gone through the common order dated 17.1.2008 passed by the National Commission in First Appeal No. No.561/2003 and in First Appeal No.646/2003 and the common order dated 15.4.2005 passed in First Appeal Nos. 562/2003 (H.P. State Electricity Board & Anr. Vs. M/s. Arsh Castings Pvt. Ltd) and First Appeal No.645/2003 (M/s. Arsh Castings Pvt. Ltd vs. H.P. State Electricity Board). The issue involved in these two sets of First Appeals is altogether different. While allowing First Appeal No.561/2003 filed by the H.P. State Electricity Board and dismissing First Appeal No.646/2003 filed by M/s. Arsh Castings Pvt. Ltd, by order dated 17th January, 2003, this Commission made the following observations: “….It appears that the Complainant has indulged in forum shopping for it is not in dispute that the Complainant has approached the Board Level Dispute Settlement Committee constituted by the H.P. State Electricity Board. The Complainant was heard by the Committee and by the order dated 12.3.99 was granted relief of almost Rs.60 lakhs by reducing the demand of Rs.1,84,46,604/- to Rs.1,23,73,389/- minus Rs.30,00,000/- already deposited by the Complainant. The Board Level Dispute Settlement Committee was approached after withdrawing the suit from the Civil Court. In our view, once the Complainant had approached the Board Level Dispute Settlement Committee they could not invoke the jurisdiction of the State Commission with regard to the same controversy as it would tantamount to allowing the consumer fora to sit in appeal over a forum provided under other provision of Law. Moreover, it would encourage the abuse of the process to encourage disapproved practice of Forum shopping and the Complainant cannot be allowed to approach the Civil Court, Settlement Committee and then the Consumer Fora after getting relief. As such complaint itself was not maintainable. In these circumstances, the complaint has to be dismissed. The First Appeal No.561/2003 is allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the complaint is dismissed accordingly”. An Order can be reviewed only if there is a mistake apparent on the face of the record. In the present case, we do not find any such mistake in the order sought to be reviewed. In the garb of review, the Petitioner seeks to reopen and reargue the case on merits, which does not fall in scope of review. No ground for review is made out. Dismissed. Registry is directed to send a copy of this Order to the petitioners. |
