Haryana

StateCommission

RP/39/2016

PAREENA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

NEIL ACHARYA - Opp.Party(s)

A.K.BISHNOI

01 Jul 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

 

                                                 

Revision Petition No  :  39 of 2016

Date of Institution:        03.06.2016

Date of Decision :         01.07.2016

 

 

M/s Pareena Infrastructure Private Limited, C-I (7-A), 2^nd Floor, Omaxe City Centre, Sohna Road, Gurgaon -122001 (Haryana) through its Authorized Representative Sanjeev Kumar, Company Secretary.

                                      Petitioner-Opposite Party No.1

Versus

 

1.      Ms. Nell Acharya son of Nandini Ranjan Acharya r/o 433, Ground Floor, Orchid Island, Sector 51, Gurgaon, Haryana.

 

2.      Ms. Nandini Acharya wife of Sh. Neil Acharya resident of 433, Ground Floor, Orchid Island, Sector 51, Gurgaon, Haryana.

Respondents-Complainants

3.      Investors Clinic Infratech Private Limited, 7, RBI, Colony, Market, Hauzkhas, New Delhi -110016 through its Managing Director.

                                      Respondent-Opposite Party No.2

 

 

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

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member                      

                                                                                                                  

Present:               Dr. Anand Kumar Bishnoi, Advocate for petitioner

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J, (ORAL)

 

The instant revision petition has been filed by M/s Pareena Infrastructure Private Limited-opposite party No.1 against the order dated May 03^rd, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Gurgaon (for short ‘District Forum’) whereby the petitioner was proceeded exparte.

2.      Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that notice was received by Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Company Secretary of the petitioner.  The date of appearance mentioned in the notice was May 03^rd, 2016. On the said date, Sh. Sanjeev Sharma was out of station and could not inform his counsel and as such, nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner. 

3.      Learned counsel has further urged that the impugned order be set aside; opportunity be granted to the petitioner to file reply and contest the complaint.  The next date of hearing before the District Forum is July 14^th, 2016.

4.      Be that as it may and without delving deeper, this Commission is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if the impugned order is set aside and opportunity is granted to the petitioner to file reply and contest the complaint.  For whatever inconvenience has been caused to the other side suitable costs shall be the remedy.

5.      Accordingly, this revision petition is accepted and the impugned order is set aside subject to the conditional cost of Rs.2000/- which is to be paid by the petitioner to the respondents-complainants, on the date fixed, before the District Forum. The petitioner is accorded opportunity to file reply and join the proceedings.

6.      This revision petition is disposed of without issuing notice to the respondent with a view to impart substantive justice to the parties and to save the huge expenses, which may be incurred by the respondent 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 Punjab and Haryana High Court rendered in Batala Machine Tools Workshop Cooperative Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur (CWP No.9563 of 2002) decided on June 27^th, 2002.

7.      The petitioner is directed to appear before the District Forum, on July 14^th, 2016, the date already fixed.

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

 

Announced 01.07.2016

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

UK