NCDRC

NCDRC

FA/823/2013

ANURAG GARG & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. SHRANKHLA CONSTRUCTION - Opp.Party(s)

MR. SUDEEPTA KUMAR PAL

30 Jan 2014

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
FIRST APPEAL NO. 823 OF 2013
 
(Against the Order dated 04/09/2013 in Complaint No. 359/2012 of the State Commission Delhi)
WITH
IA/7529/2013
1. ANURAG GARG & ANR.
425/3, 35 CIVIL LINES, ROORKEE,
UTTARAKHAND
2. ASHOK KUMAR GARG
425/3, 35 CIVIL LINES, ROORKEE,
UTTARAKHAND
...........Appellant(s)
Versus 
1. M/S. SHRANKHLA CONSTRUCTION
OFFICE: A-189, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-1,
NEW DELHI-20
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. CHAUDHARI, PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. DR. B.C. GUPTA, MEMBER

For the Appellant :MR. SUDEEPTA KUMAR PAL
For the Respondent :

Dated : 30 Jan 2014
ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed this appeal for setting aside the order of dismissal in default alongwith application for condonation of delay of 47 days. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant came to know about the order in first week of October, 2013 and received copy on 17.10.2013 and later on, this appeal was filed. As complaint was dismissed in default, we deem it appropriate to condone delay in filing the appeal. Consequently, application for condonation of delay is allowed and delay of 47 days in filing appeal is condoned, subject to depositing Rs. 2,000/- as cost with the Legal Aid Fund of this Commission within four weeks. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant appeared before the State Commission on 22.11.2012 and 04.01.2013 and matter was adjourned for filing written statement on 22.04.2013. On 22.04.2013, appellant could not appear before the State Commission and written statement was also not filed and matter was adjourned to 04.09.2013. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that on account of traffic jam, he could not appear before the State Commission and complaint was dismissed in default, which may be restored. As complaint has been dismissed in default and even written statement has not been filed by the opposite party, we deem it appropriate to allow this appeal and restore the complaint. Consequently, appeal filed by the appellant is allowed and impugned order dated 04.09.2013, passed by the State Commission in Complaint No. 359/2012, Anurag Garg & Ors. vs. M/s. Shrankhla Construction is set aside and complaint is restored at its original number. Appellant is directed to appear before the State Commission on 28.02.2014 and the State Commission will proceed further in accordance with law.

 
......................J
K.S. CHAUDHARI
PRESIDING MEMBER
......................
DR. B.C. GUPTA
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.