Haryana

StateCommission

A/1300/2016

AUTO WORLD - Complainant(s)

Versus

PARDEEP KUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

B.S.GARG

23 Jan 2017

ORDER

 

STAE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA

 

  First Appeal No.1300  of 2016

 Date of Institution:29.12.2016

  Date  of  Decision:23.01.2017

 

1.  Auto World, 116-B, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg apposite Capital Cinema, Ambala Cantt, through its partner Saurav Gandhi.
2. Managing Director, Honda Motors Cycle and Scooter India Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.03, IMT, Manesar, Gurugaram, Haryana.

…..Appellants

Versus

 

1.      Pardeep Kumar S/o Sh.Puran Chand, R/o Villae Budhian,Tehsil Barara, Distt. Ambala.

2.      the Manager,Guru Nanak Honda, Near Bus Stand, Tehsil Barara, Distt. Ambala.

…..Respondents

 

CORAM:             Mr.R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial  Member

                              Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member

                   

Present:-    Mr.Sanjay Jain, Advocate counsel for the appellants.

                  

                                                 ORDER

R.K.BISHNOI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

           

It was alleged by complainant that he purchased scooter for Rs.50,280/- on 23.03.2015 from Opposite Party (O.P.) No.1 with two years warranty.  since very beginning engine was having knocking noise problem and O.P. No.1 assured him that problem would be over after first service, but, despite two services  and changing of crank shaft, the problem existed.  O.Ps. failed to remove the defect of the scooter and failed to provide proper services.

2.      O.Ps.  were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 29.07.2016.

3.      After hearing both the parties, learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ambala (In short “District Forum”)  allowed complaint vide impugned order dated 18.03.2016 and directed as under:-

“(i)     The OPs are directed to replace the vehicle in question with new one of the same Model and if the same model is not available then to refund the cost of the vehicle to the tune of Rs.50,280/- (Annexure C-1) alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of complaint till its realization.

(ii)      Also to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- on account of mental harassment & Agony alongwith cost of litigation.”

4.      Feeling aggrieved therefrom, O.P. Nos.2 and 3.-appellants have preferred this appeal. 

5.      Arguments heard. File perused.

6.      Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the learned District forum wrongly proceeded ex parte and due opportunity of hearing be afforded.

7.      It is opined by this Commission in Revision Petition No.39 of 2016 titled as M/s Pareena Infrastructure Vs. Ms. Nell Acharya decided on 01.07.2016 that matter can be remanded even without issuing notice to other party. It is the golden principle of law that proper opportunity of hearing should be afforded to the other party and one cannot be condemned unheard. 

8.      The complainant is not going to suffer any irreparable loss if appellant-O.Ps. are afforded an opportunity of defending themselves before the learned District Forum, so in these circumstances ex parte proceedings dated  18.03.2016 initiated against them are set aside and impugned order dated 22.11.2016 is hereby set aside subject to payment of costs of Rs.5000/- to the complainant before the District Forum.   Appeal is allowed.  Let the appellant be afforded an opportunity to file reply and lead evidence etc. thereafter the complaint be decided on merits.

9.      The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum, Ambala on 22.02.2017.

 

 

January 23rd, 2017     Urvashi Agnihotri                    R.K.Bishnoi,                                                                           Member                                  Judicial Member                                                                     Addl. Bench                            Addl.Bench                

S.K.