Haryana

StateCommission

RP/36/2016

HYUNDAI MOTORS INDIA LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

NARESH KUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

VISHAL GUPTA

04 Jul 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA

 

                                                Revision Petition No.   36 of 2016

                                                Date of Institution:       02.06.2016

                                                Date of Decision:         04.07.2016

  

 

1.      Hyundai Motor India Limited, Plot No.H-1, SIPCOT, Industrial Park, Irrungattukottai Sriperumbudar Taluk, Kancheepuram District, Tamil Nadu-602105 through its Authorized Representative.

2.      Hyundai Motor India Limited, A-30, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi through its Authorized Representative.

3.      Hyundai Motor India Limited, Regional Office-1, DLF Building, Tower B, 3^rd Floor, RGCT Park, Chandigarh through its Regional Manager.

4.      Hyundai Motor India Limited, 2^nd, 5^th & 6^th Floor, Corporate One (Baani Building), Plot No.5, Commercial Centre, Jasola, New Delhi – 110076.

Petitioners-Opposite Parties No.1 to 4

 

Versus

 

1.      Naresh Kumar son of Ram Nath, resident of House No.144, Ward No.1, Near Situ Wala Kaun, Kharkhoda, Sonepat, Haryana.

Respondent-Complainant

2.      The Malwa Auto Sales (P) Limited, N.H.1, 31 K.M, Stone, G.T. Road, Kundli, Sonepat, Haryana.

Respondent-opposite party No.5

 

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

                   Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                   Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member.

 

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

                   Sh. Jawahar Narang, Advocate for the respondent No.1

                   Sh. Aftab Singh Khara, Advocate for the respondent No.2

 

O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J, (ORAL)

 

          By filing this revision petition, Hyundai Motor India Limited-opposite parties No.1 to 4 (petitioners) has challenged the order dated April 12^th, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sonepat (for short ‘District Forum), whereby, application filed by Naresh Kumar-complainant for striking off defence of the petitioners, was allowed.

2.      Learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that the District Forum after taking on record their reply on March 15^th, 2016, struck off their defence vide impugned order. 

3.      He further urged that the impugned order be set aside and District Forum be directed to accept their reply and decide the complaint on merits.

4.      Whatever the case may be, it is settled principle of law, that every lis should normally be decided, on merits, than by resorting to hyper- technicalities. When hyper-technicalities, and the substantial justice, are pitted against each other, then the latter shall prevail over the former. The procedure, is, in the ultimate, the handmaid of justice, meant to advance the cause thereof, than to thwart the same. The procedural Rule, therefore, has to be liberally construed, and care must be taken, that so strict interpretation be not placed thereon, whereby, technicality may tend to triumph over justice. It has to be kept in mind, that an overly strict construction of procedural provisions, may result in the stifling of material evidence, of a party, even if, for adequate reasons, which may be beyond its control. We must always remember that procedural law, is not an obstruction, but an aid to justice. Procedural prescriptions are the hand-maid, and not the mistress, a lubricant, not a resistant, in the administration of justice. If the breach can be corrected, without injury to the just disposal of a case, regulatory requirement should not be enthroned into a dominant desideratum. The Courts and the quasi-Judicial Tribunals, have been set up, with the sole purpose of dispensing justice, and not to wreck the end result, on technicalities. This revision petition is allowed and the impugned order is set-aside. Consequently, the District Forum is directed to accept the reply of the petitioners and decide the complaint on merits.

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

 

 

Announced: 04.07.2016

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

 

UK