Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/533/2022

Eswaramurthy - Complainant(s)

Versus

S.Chitra - Opp.Party(s)

Muthukrishnan

14 Feb 2023

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

 

BEFORE :       Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. SUBBIAH                              PRESIDENT

Thiru R  VENKATESAPERUMAL                               MEMBER

                        

F.A.NO.533/2022

(Against order in CC.NO.24/2019 on the file of the DCDRC, Tiruppur)

 

DATED THIS THE 14^th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 

 

K. Eswaramurthy

S/o. Krishnasamy, Manager

Sri Siragiri Mahal                                                 M/s. S.Muthukrishnan

Anaipudur, Thirumurugan Poondi                                Counsel for

Avinasi Taluk, Tiruppur District                          Appellant / Opposite party

 

                                                         Vs.

S. Chitra

W/o. T.K.Arumugan                                                    M/s. K. Prabu

39A, Sugam Residency                                                 Counsel for

Ammapalayam, Tiruppur                                      Respondent/ Complainant

 

          The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Commission against the opposite party praying for certain direction. The District Commission allowed the complaint. Against the said exparte order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party praying to set aside the order of the District Commission dt.22.11.2019 in CC. No.24/2019.

 

          This petition coming before us for hearing finally today.  Upon hearing the arguments of the counsel appearing on bothside, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Commission, this commission made the following order in the open court:

 

JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH ,  PRESIDENT  (Open court)

 

1.      The opposite party before the District Commission is the appellant herein.

 

2.    The case of the complainant before the District Commission is that the complainant had booked the marriage hall belongs to the opposite party, for performing the marriage of one Ms. Sruthi with Mr.Hariharan.  The said hall was previously used as a Banian factory, and after little modification, the hall was rented for performing marriages.  The complainant had paid a sum of Rs.73000/- on 20.3.2019 towards booking of the hall for the marriage to be performed on 13.6.2019.   Since the marriage hall does not have any facilities, the family members of groom showed their dissatisfaction.  Therefore, the complainant approached the opposite party, for cancelling the booking, and requested for refund of the amount of Rs.73000/- on 11.4.2019.  But the opposite party had refused to refund the amount paid by the complainant.  Though several personal requests and letters were sent praying for refund of the amount paid, the opposite party had not replied.  Thus alleging negligence on the part of the opposite party, the complainant filed the complaint before the District Commission praying for a direction to the opposite party to refund the amount paid alongwith interest @9% p.a., and compensation of Rs.2 lakhs and cost of Rs.3000/-. 

 

3.       The Appellant/ opposite party, though appeared through counsel before the District Commission, failed to file their written version, hence they were set exparte, and an exparte order was passed in favour of the Respondent/ complainant by holding that the service of the opposite party is deficient, and thus directed the opposite party to refund the claim amount of Rs.73000/- alongwith compensation of Rs.20000/- and cost of Rs.3000/-.  Aggrieved over the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party, praying for setting aside the order and for a chance to contest the case on merit. 

 

4.       Before this commission the opposite party   would contend that their non-appearance before the District Commission is neither willful nor wanton.  They have a fair chance of succeeding the complaint.  Thus prayed for an opportunity to contest the case on merit.

 

5.       We have heard the learned counsel appearing on bothside.

 

6.       Having considered the submissions made by both parties we are of the considered opinion that a chance may be given to the opposite party to agitate their right on merit.  Eventhough on considering the lethargic attitude of the opposite party in not filing their written version though preferred to enter appearance, we are inclined to allow this appeal on imposing certain cost, and by way of order dt.30.1.2023 we have directed the appellant/ opposite party to deposit a sum of Rs.3000/- towards cost to the legal aid account of the State Commission, on or before 13.2.2023, which was complied with.  Hence this appeal is allowed today by remanding back the complaint to the District Commission for fresh disposal according to law. 

 

7.       In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Commission, Tiruppur, in C.C.No.24/2019 dt.22.11.2019, and the matter is remanded back to the District Commission, Tiruppur, for fresh disposal according to law on merit.

Parties are directed to appear before the District Commission, Tiruppur on 14.3.2023, for taking further instructions. On which date itself, the opposite party shall file their Written version, proof affidavit, and documents if any. The District Commission is directed to dispose of the complaint, within three months, from the date of appearance, according to law on merit.  

The amount deposited, by the appellant, shall remain in the custody of this commission, till the order passed in original complaint.

 

 

 

 

   R  VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                  R. SUBBIAH

                 MEMBER                                                                             PRESIDENT