Delhi

StateCommission

FA/425/2014

DR. VARDHMAN JHA - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAJ KUMAR PRASAD - Opp.Party(s)

16 Jul 2014

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION DELHI
Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
 
First Appeal No. FA/425/2014
(Arisen out of Order Dated 05/03/2014 in Case No. 575/2013 of District East Delhi)
 
1. DR. VARDHMAN JHA
R/O 1 ANSARI ROAD, DARIYAGANJ NEW DELHI-110002
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. RAJ KUMAR PRASAD
R/O S-608, NEHRU ENCLAVE, SCHOOL BLOCK SHAKARPUR , DELHI -92
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONABLE MRS. Salma Noor PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'ABLE MR. JUSTICE N.P KAUSHIK MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:
For the Respondent:
ORDER

 

                                                                                                                 Date of Decision: 16.07.2014

                                    

First Appeal – 425/2014

 

Dr.Vardhaman Jain,

S/o Dr. D.B. Jain,

R/o 1, Ansari Road,

Daryaganj,

New Delhi-110002.

………Appellant

Vs

Raj Kumar Prasad,

S/o Late Sh. Gangu Prasad,

R/o S-608, Nehru Enclave,

School Block, Shakarpur,

Delhi-92.

                                                 ……..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.575/2013 Raj Kumar Prasad vs Director, Som Dutt Medical Centre & Ors. filed before District Forum, Distt. East, Saini Enclave, Delhi 05.03.2014 was fixed for filing WS by the OP No. 2/Appellant, but due to non-appearance, the Forum proceeded ex-parte. 

2.      That is what brings the Appellant/OP No.2 in appeal before this Commission.

3.     We have heard Shri Abhinav Jain, Counsel for the Appellant at the admission stage as there is no need to hear the Respondent.

4.      The version of the Appellant/OP No.2 for his non-appearance on the date fixed is that his counsel reached the court around 11.20 due to heavy traffic and by that time, the District Forum proceeded ex-parte against the OP No.2. 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 ex-parte orders dated 05.03.2014 in question, subject to payment of costs of Rs.2,000/- which the OP No.2 will pay to the complainant on the next date.  The case is remanded back to the District Forum, Distt. East, Saini Enclave, Delhi with the direction that they will allow the Appellant/OP No.2 to file the WS and decide the case after hearing both the parties. The Appellant/OP No.2 is directed to appear before the District Forum, Distt. East, Saini Enclave, Delhi on 7.10.2014.

5.   A copy of this order be sent to District Forum, Distt. East, Saini Enclave, 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.