Haryana

StateCommission

RP/55/2024

HSVP - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAM NIWAS - Opp.Party(s)

SIKANDER BAKSHI

12 Aug 2024

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA  

                                                                  Date of Institution: 23.07.2024

                Date of hearing: 12.08.2024

                      Date of pronouncement: 12.08.2024

 

Revision Petition No.55 of 2024

1. Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran, through its Estate Officer, HSVP, Kaithal, Haryana.
2. The Chief Administrator (wrongly mentioned Assistant), Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran, C-3, HSVP (HQ), Sector-6, Panchkula, Haryana.
3.  

 

Versus

 

1.      Ram Niwas S/o Sh. Ram Chander, R/o Ward No. 7, Cheeka, Tehsil Guhla,           District Kaithal.                                                                       ….Respondent

2.      The Municipal Committee, Near Ch. Devi Lal Park, Cheeka, District Kaithal           through Secretary/Executive Officer.                     …Performa Respondent

 

CORAM:   Mr. Naresh Katyal, Judicial Member.

                   Mr. S.C. Kaushik, Member. 

         

Present:-    Mr. Sikander Bakshi, counsel for petitioners.

O R D E R

PER: NARESH KATYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

                             Delay of 363 days in filing of this revision petition stands condoned for the reasons stated in application for condonation of delay and accompanying affidavit. Irrespective of this, although the order dated 17.04.2023 passed in the presence of representative of revisionist, yet it is prima facie visible that it is laxity on the part of revisionist- Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran to file this revision petition with promptness. Be that as it may, this Commission condones the delay in filing of this Revision Petition. Accordingly, application (M.A. No. 1069 of 2024) stands disposed of.

2.                 In this revision petition; petitioners- Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran has assailed legality of order dated 17.04.2023 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-Kaithal vide which defence of revisionist-Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran has been “struck off”.  

3.                Learned counsel for revisionist has contended that: revisionists- Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran on the same day (17.04.2023) have filed application for deletion of their name from the array of complaint and this application is still pending disposal before learned District Consumer Commission-Kaithal.

4.                This Commission is conscious of well settled legal adage that: it is no more res-integra by now that all procedural laws are meant to sub-serve the cause of justice and not to defeat the same and technicalities should not come in front of imparting substantial justice to parties by deciding their lis on merits. Further, in process of justice dispensation, every litigant must be afforded adequate opportunity to put forward his/her/its case in a meaningful manner.     

5.                On subjectively and critically analyzing revisionist’s contentions in the light of above quoted legal principle;, this Commission is of opinion that there would be no need to issue notice of this revision to respondents in order to avoid unnecessary delay in disposal of main complaint presently pending before learned District Consumer Commission-Kaithal. Of course, it will also save the parties to this lis from the burden of unnecessary expenses. This Commission is also of firm opinion that no prejudice would be caused to complainant (Ram Niwas), in case revisionists are allowed to contest the proceedings of complaint case, by tendering defence/written version. Instead, learned District Consumer Commission would be able to effectively dispose of the complaint before it after subjectively and critically analyzing rival case and evidence put forward by all parties.

6.                In view of above, this revision petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 17.04.2023 passed by learned District Consumer Commission-Kaithal in Complaint Case No.306 of 2022 titled as Ram Niwas Vs. The Municipal Committee & another is hereby set aside. Revisionists (Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran-OP No.2 & 3 in Complaint Case No. 306 of 2022) would now cause its appearance before learned District Consumer Commission-Kaithal on 22.08.2024-date already fixed in complaint before learned District Consumer Commission, either through its authorized representative or through counsel. Revisionists would also tender its written defence/written version on the same day (22.08.2024). Thereafter, it would also lead its evidence. Above concession awarded to revisionists would however, be subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited by revisionist- Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran in District Legal Services Authority-Kaithal and receipt in this regard would be produced in record of Complaint Case (C.C. No.306 of 2022) pending before learned District Consumer Commission-Kaithal. Payment of cost amount of Rs.5,000/- would be the condition precedent for tendering defence/written version by revisionists.

7.                A copy of this order be provided to all parties, 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.

Pronounced on 12^th August, 2024

                                                                        S.C. Kaushik                  Naresh Katyal                                                                 Member                          Judicial Member

                                                         Addl. Bench                   Addl. Bench

D.K.