THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE. (ADDL. BENCH)
APPEAL NO.1508/2023
DATED THIS THE 21st DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
PRESENT
SRI RAVI SHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
SMT. SUNITA C.BAGEWADI, MEMBER
Bangalore Electricity Supply
Company Limited (BESCOM)
Corporate office at KR Circle,
Nrupathunga Road, Appellant/s
Bengaluru – 560 001
Represented by its
General Manager (Q&SS)/
Assistant Executive Engineer (Ele)
(By Sri.H.V.Devaraju, Advocates)
V/s
Sri.R.Subramani,
S/o Mr.Ramachandra Chari,
Proprietor of Nandi Prints, … Respondent/s
No.1031, 1st Floor, 25th Main,
40th Cross, Jayanagar, 9th Block,
Bengaluru-560 001
ORDER ON ADMISSION
BY SRI.RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
The Appellant/Opposite Party has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the III Addl. District Consumer Commission, Bengaluru in complaint No.103/2022 on IA filed by this appellant to permit them to file version, in the interest of justice and equity and submits that the complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission alleging deficiency in service and sought for compensation to the tune of Rs.1.00 crore as the printing press was caught on fire and the entire printing press was destructed. The complainant alleges due to high supply of electricity, the said incident had happened, hence, filed a complaint for compensation.
2. After issuance of notice from the District Commission, this appellant appeared through their counsel and filed preliminary objections with respect to the maintainability of the complaint since the claim amount was one crore. After the adjudication on the said application, the District Commission dismissed the application and proceeded to adjudicate the matter on merits. Immediately, this appellant initiated an application to file version, since they have not filed any version because they have filed an application for maintainability of the complaint. The said application was rejected and even the application to permits them to file version also rejected for the reasons that the version was filed beyond statutory period. In fact, after the maintainability of the complaint only they have chosen to file version contending the allegations made by the complainant. The District Commission could have considered the application and accepted the version, instead of that the District Commission rejected the application and proceeded to try the matter. The rejection of application resulted in great hardship and injustice to this appellant at the same time no hardship causes to the complainant if the version or defence taken. Hence prays to set aside the order passed by the District Commission and permit them to file version and contest the matter, in the interest of justice and equity.
3. Heard on admission.
4. This appellant after receipt of the notice from the District Commission had filed an application with respect to maintainability. The District Commission could have kept open the said application and called the Opposite Party to file a detailed version with respect to the allegations made by the complainant. Instead of that, the District Commission proceeded to try the matter on preliminary issue. Subsequently the said application was rejected. Once the application on maintainability was rejected an opportunity ought to be given to file version/defence with respect to the allegations made by the complainant. The District Commission had not provided such opportunity. Hence, it is just and proper to provide an opportunity to take defence against the allegation of the complainant. As such the order passed by the District Commission is hereby set aside and the Appellant/Opposite Party is permitted to file version on the next date of hearing before the District Commission and the District Commission accordingly directed to accept the version filed by this appellant/Opposite Party and proceed with the matter in accordance with law and dispose expeditiously. Hence, we proceed to pass the following:-
O R D E R
The appeal is allowed on payment of cost of Rs.1,000/- payable before the District Commission to the complainant.
The Appellant/Opposite Party is directed to file version on the next date of hearing before the District Commission and the District Commission accept the version and proceed with the matter in accordance with law and dispose expeditiously.
Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as concerned District Consumer Commission.
Member Judicial Member
Jrk/-
