Heard the learned counsel for  both the sides.

2.              This appeal is  filed  U/S-41 of the Consumer Protection Act,2019(herein-after called the Act). Hereinafter, the parties to this appeal shall be referred to  with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.

3.                  The case of    the complainant, in nutshell is that  the complainant had purchased  a TV set from  OP No.1 on 25.10.2019 and the OP No.3 is the manufacturer of that Samsung TV. It is alleged inter-alia that there is defect with the TV during warranty period and accordingly  complainant informed the OP but no action was taken. So, he filed the complaint case.

4.                   The Ops are set-exparte in this case.

5.        Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that learned District Forum  has committed error in law by dismissing  the complaint for non-prosecution  although he is ready to file evidence. Similarly respondent no.3 submitted that  also he was set-exparte. They submitted that during Covid-19 period the case was filed and due to pandemic steps were not taken. However, written version was filed  but   that was not accepted.

6.               Considered the submission of both the parties.  It appears that the case has been dismissed for default and the OP have been also set-exparte. It is admitted fact that during Covid  pandemic,2019  the proceedings in the Court and Tribunal  are not regularly monitored. The written version also filed by OP No.3 was also rejected   on 17.06.2022 without any reason assigned. However the order dtd.19.07.2022, 20.07.2022  and 30.08.2022  are as follows:-

 Order dtd.19.07.2022

                Case is taken up being posted for hearing. None turns up inspite of repeated calls. Put up later for orders.

                                Sd/-Member                                       Sd/- President

Later 3.45 PM:-    Case record is taken up again. And it is noticed that none appears in spite of repeated calls. This shows that the complainant is no more interested to proceed further in this case. At this one D/Asst.Mr.Panda produce a time petition filed on behalf of the complainant seeking adjournment for hearing of this case to another date. But on call it is noticed that neither the complainant nor his representing lawyer is present in the court hall. However, put up tomorrow for hearing as a last chance enabling the complainant  to have his say if any.

                                 Sd/- Member                                     Sd/- President

Order dtd. 20.07.2022

                     The matter is posted today for hearing by the both sides. No steps taken from both side. None appears inspite of repeated calls. On perusal of the order sheet it found that the complainant remains absent. Thereafter, long time has elapsed. Hence, it is felt that the complainant has no interest to proceed with this case. However, put up the case later.

                                Sd/- Member                               Sd/- President

Later:-  None appears inspite of repeated calls. As there is insufficient evidence in this case and the complainant is not also interested, this Commission is unable to proceed further this case.

            Hence, the case is dismissed being devoid of any merit.

                              Sd/- Member                                Sd/- President

Order dt. 30.08.2022

                Learned  counsel for the complainant/Appellant is present. “Heard”. Ld counsel for complainant. The present application has been filed to recall the order dt. 20.07.2022 passed by this Commission. As there is no provision in the C.P.Act 2019 to recall the order passed by this Commission, the present application is not maintainable, hence the same is rejected.

                           Sd/- Member                                     Sd/-President

    7.                  Aforesaid order of learned District Commission shows that learned District Commission was  hurried to disposed of case as date of hearing has been adjourned from hour to hour and previous  day to next day. It is true that case should be disposed of within the period as  per the Act but averred that object  is to serve the consumers with natural justice. The way    of disposal  as depicted above is against the latter and  spirit of the Act . Moreover the order dtd.20.07.2022  shows that case has been not only dismissed due to absence of complainant but also on merit. In view  of discussion made above at the stage of admission, we are  of  the view that all  above orders are illegal and improper and hence set-aside.

8.         Bereft above,  on 30.08.2022 a petition is filed to restore   the case  to file but  that was also rejected as the Act  does not allow to restore  the complaint case. But it appears  that  order  dtd.30.08.2022 was  passed in R.A. 2/2022  which is purportedly   filed U/S-40 of the Act to review  the  order dtd.20.07.2022. But no discussion about the provision of law.  

9.              Learned District Commission is also directed to  summon both the parties and accept the written version of OP No.3  already on record and  issue  notice to the OP No.1 & 2   and proceed the case  in accordance with law for denovo hearing  afresh  according to law within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of this order.  Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned District Commission on 27.04.2022  to take further instruction.

                  The appeal is disposed of accordingly. No cost.

                Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the confonet  or webtsite of this  Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.   

                DFR be sent back forthwith.