Delhi

StateCommission

FA/307/2014

D.J.B. - Complainant(s)

Versus

OM PRAKASH BHATIA - Opp.Party(s)

08 Jul 2014

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION DELHI
Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
 
First Appeal No. FA/307/2014
(Arisen out of Order Dated in Case No. of District State Commission)
 
1. D.J.B.
VARUNALAYA BUILDING, JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI-110005.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. OM PRAKASH BHATIA
R/O FLAT No. 1-297/DDA FLATS, NARAINA VIHAR, ASHOK NIKETAN, NEAR PVR CINEMA, NEW DELHI-110028.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONABLE MRS. Salma Noor PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'ABLE MR. JUSTICE N.P KAUSHIK MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:
For the Respondent:
ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION :DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

                                                                                                                 Date of Decision: 08.07.2014

                                  

First Appeal – 307/2014

 

1.Delhi Jal Board,

Varunalaya Building,

Jhandewalan,

New Delhi-110005.

Through Chairman

 

2.Delhi Jal Board,

Sector-7, R.K. Puram,

New Delhi.

Through ZRO

………Appellants

Vs

 

Om Prakash Bhatia,

R/o Flat No. 1-297/DDA Flats,

Naraina Vihar, Ashok Niketan,

Near PVR Cinema,

New Delhi-110028.

……..Respondent

 

 

CORAM

 

Salma Noor, Presiding Member

NP Kaushik, Member(Judicial)

 

1.   Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?

2.   To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

 

SALMA NOOR, PRESIDING MEMBER

 

1.     In a complaint case bearing No.120/2011 Om Prakash Bhatia vs Delhi Jal Board filed before District Forum, South-West, Sheikh Sarai, Delhi 07.01.2014 was fixed for filing evidence by the OP/Appellant, but due to non-appearance, the Forum proceeded ex-parte.

 

 

 

2.      That is what brings the Appellant/OP in appeal before this Commission.

 

3.     We have heard Ms Arti Bansal, Counsel for the  Appellant at the admission stage as there is no need to hear the Respondent.

       

4.     The version of the Appellant/OP for his non-appearance on the date fixed is that the counsel who was conducting the case could not appeared before the Forum without giving any reason to the Appellant and the default occurred.  In support of his contention, Appellant has filed an affidavit. There is no plausible reason not to rely and not to act upon this version of the appellant. Besides that it has never been the policy of law to stifle a contest and wherever possible, under the circumstances a lenient view in this regard has been recommended, so that the parties may have an opportunity to present their case before the Forum, so that the matter may be decided on merit. We therefore, allow the appeal setting aside the exparte orders dated 07.01.2014 in question, and remand the case back to District Forum, South West, Sheikh Sarai, Delhi with a direction to the District Forum that they will allow the Appellant/OP to file evidence and decide the case after hearing both the parties.  The Appellant/OP is directed to appear before the District Forum, South West, Sheikh Sarai, Delhi on 07.08.2014.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.   A copy of this order be sent to District Forum, South West, Sheikh Sarai, Delhi to keep it on complaint file and for compliance.

 

 
 
[HONABLE MRS. Salma Noor]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[HON'ABLE MR. JUSTICE N.P KAUSHIK]
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.