STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA
Date of Institution: 14.12.2023
Date of final hearing: 04.12.2024
Date of pronouncement: 04.12.2024
Revision Petition No.102 of 2023
Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. through its authorized signatory having office at Gateway Building, Apollo Bunder, Mumbai-400001. (Wrongly impleaded in complaint as Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. situated at Selenium, Tower-B, Plot No. 31-32, Gachibowli, Financial District, Nanakramguda, Hyderabad, Telengana-50032, India).
.….Petitioner
Versus
- Rajiv Kumar S/o Sh. Ravi Kumar, aged about 37, R/o H.No. 2310, 2nd Floor, Sector-23, Chandigarh now residing at Flat No. 164, First Floor, Jarnail Enclave, Phase-2, Zirakpur.
- Harbir Automobile Pvt. Ltd. (HBS Motors) situated at Plot No. 350, Industrial Phase-2, Panchkula-134109.
Another address: Harbir Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. situated at Plot No. 182/7, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh.
….Respondents
CORAM: Sh. Naresh Katyal, Judicial Member.
Sh. S.C. Kaushik, Member.
Present:- Ms. Sapna Khurana, counsel for petitioner.
Mr. Ishant Khangwal, counsel for respondent No.1.
None for respondent No.2.
O R D E R
PER: NARESH KATYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
Delay of 36 days in filing of revision petition stands condoned for the reasons stated in the application seeking condonation of delay and accompanying affidavit which constitute ‘sufficient cause’ within the ambit of Section 5 of Limitation Act.
2. In this revision petition; petitioner (OP No. 1 in complaint) has invited challenge to legality of order dated 09.08.2023 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-Panchkula vide which petitioner/OP No.1 has been proceeded against ex-parte, by observing simultaneously that statutory period of 45 days for filing written statement has already expired. Main complaint is pending before learned District Consumer Commission-Panchkula. Record of complaint has been requisitioned. Today, Mr. Ishant Khangwal has appeared on behalf of complainant by filing his memo of appearance.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner has urged that non-appearance of petitioner/OP No.1 before learned District Consumer Commission on 09.08.2023 was neither intentional nor it was accentuated by any mala-fide and revisionist has not gained anything by not filing written statement. It is urged that because of name and address of petitioner/company has been wrongly given so service could not be affected upon it. Address of one of the manufacturing plant of petitioner has been given, where no public dealing takes place and there is no office for corporate persons and authorized signatory. It is urged that because of this reason; notice in complaint could not be served upon petitioner/revisionist and resultantly it was not in knowledge about filing of complaint and all these facts have ultimately led into non-appearance of petitioner. Further, it is urged that now permission be granted to petitioner herein to tender its defense/written version by putting appearance before learned District Consumer Commission by setting aside order dated 09.08.2023. As per zimni order dated 23.01.2024 passed in the complaint by learned District Consumer Commission; it is fixed for evidence of OP No.2.
4. On analyzing above contentions and while keeping in view the contention of learned counsel for petitioner/OP No.1 that main complaint is still at stage of recording evidence; therefore, this Commission is of firm opinion that no prejudice would be caused to complainant (Rajiv Kumar) in case petitioner/OP No.1 is now allowed to join proceedings of complaint case and to tender its defense/written statement and be also permitted to lead its evidence thereafter. While observing so, this Commission is conscious of well settled legal adage that all procedural laws are meant to sub-serve the cause of justice and not to defeat the same. Further, in process of justice dispensation, every litigant must be afforded adequate opportunity to put forward his/her/its case in a meaningful manner and to prove the same by leading evidence, admissible in law. In case titled as Rajeev Hitendra Pathak & Ors. Vs. Achyut Kashinath Karekar & Another, Civil Appeal No. 4307 of 2007 AND case titled as M.O.H. Lathers Vs. United Commercial Bank Civil Appeal No.8155 of 2001 both decided on 19.08.2011 reported in 2011 (4) PLR 274; Hon’ble Apex Court has held that: “State Commission or District Consumer Forum do not have power to set aside their own ex-parte order nor they have power to review their own orders. This power vests in National Commission only by Section 22 (A) of the Act.” It would legally imply that ex-parte order passed by learned District Consumer Commission can be legally assailed by filing revision petition.
5. In view of above, this revision petition is allowed and impugned order dated 09.08.2023 passed by learned District Consumer Commission, Panchkula in Complaint Case No.134 of 2023 titled as Rajiv Kumar Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. & Another is hereby set aside. Petitioner herein (Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd.-OP No.1 in Complaint Case No. 134 of 2023) would now appear before learned District Consumer Commission-Panchkula on 30.01.2025, either through its authorized representative or through counsel and would also file its written version/written statement on that day (30.01.2025) itself. This concession granted to petitioner herein/OP No. 1 would however, be subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited by petitioner in District Legal Services Authority-Panchkula and receipt in this regard would be produced in record of Complaint Case (C.C. No.134 of 2023) pending before learned District Consumer Commission-Panchkula. Deposit of cost amount of Rs.5,000/- would be condition precedent for filing written statement by revisionist and to put its appearance. Petitioner is now permitted to lead its evidence (oral or documentary), after tendering defense/written version and for this purpose; learned District Consumer Commission would grant one effective opportunity to it. Thereafter, learned District Consumer Commission would proceed ahead in accordance with law.
6. Parties through their counsel/representative are directed to appear before learned District Consumer Commission-Panchkula on 30.01.2025 and record of complaint case be sent back forthwith along with copy of this order.
7. A copy of this order be provided to parties of this lis, free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. This order be also uploaded forthwith on website of this Commission for perusal of parties.
8. File be consigned to record room.
Date of pronouncement: 04th December, 2024.
S.C. Kaushik Naresh Katyal
Member Judicial Member
Addl. Bench Addl. Bench
