(Per Shri P.N.Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member)

(1)               Respondent has sent written submission by post.  Today, he is absent. 

(2)               We have perused the order passed by the South Mumbai District Forum in Consumer Complaint No.261/2011 On finding that in spite of sending notice by RPAD, the opponent/revision petitioner was absent, the district forum proceeded ex-parte.  Upon hearing Adv.J.Vyas for the petitioner, we are of the view that there is no scope for interfering with the order passed by the district forum.  While impeaching the order of the forum below, the Commission sitting in revision simply has to see correctness of the order or whether the order is beyond jurisdiction and whether it is involving any impropriety.  Tested on this touchstone, the order passed by the forum below cannot be said to be passed without jurisdiction.  The forum below had all the power to pass the ex-parte order on finding the opponent is absent despite service of notice.  We find no substance in the revision petition.  Hence, the order.

ORDER

(1)     Revision Petition No.23/12 stands dismissed.

(2)     No order as to costs.

(3)     Inform the parties accordingly.

Pronounced on 17^th October, 2012.