Uttar Pradesh

StateCommission

RP/112/2016

O.I.C Ltd - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sahabad Textile - Opp.Party(s)

Vaibhav Raj

21 Oct 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UP
C-1 Vikrant Khand 1 (Near Shaheed Path), Gomti Nagar Lucknow-226010
 
Revision Petition No. RP/112/2016
(Arisen out of Order Dated 21/03/2016 in Case No. C/136/2015 of District Meerut)
 
1. O.I.C Ltd
Lucknow
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Sahabad Textile
Meerut
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Bal Kumari MEMBER
 
For the Petitioner:
For the Respondent:
Dated : 21 Oct 2016
Final Order / Judgement

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW.

 

REVISION NO.112 OF 2016

 

(Against the judgment/order dated 18.07.2016 & 21.03.2016 in Complaint Case No.136/2015 of the District Consumer Forum, Meerut.)

 

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Regional Office, IInd Floor, 43,

Hazratganj, Lucknow.

Through its Manager.

        ...............Revisionist

 

Vs

 

M/s Sahahbad Textile,

Through its Proprietor Khalid Ahmad,

R/o 85/3 Khandak Bazar,

Meerut.

                     ...............Opposite Party

     BEFORE:

     HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT

    HON’BLE SMT. BAL KUMARI, MEMBER   

 

    For the Revisionist                        : Sri Vaibhav Raj, Advocate.

    For the Opposite Party                           : None present.

 

    Dated: 21.10.2016

JUDGMENT

 

MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN (ORAL)

 

Heard learned Counsel for revisionsit Sri Vaibhav Raj and perused impugned judgment and order dated 21.03.2016 passed by District Consumer Forum, Meerut in complaint case No.136/15 Shahbad Textile Vs OIC.

Vide impugned order dated 21.03.2016 District Consumer Forum has ordered to proceed exparte against revisionist after having closed opportunity of written statement.

Impugned order passed by District Consumer Forum is in accordance with Section 13 (2) (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as well as proposition laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. reported in 1 (2016) CPJ (1) (SC). We found no

-2-

justification for interference in impugned order. However considering the proposition laid down by Hon’ble National Commission in recent judgment rendered in first appeal No.257/16 Rudra Buildwell Constructions Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. VS Dharampal on 26.05.2016 revisionist may be permitted to participate in subsequent proceeding of the complaint.

In view of above revision is dismissed with the liberty to revisionist to move application before District Consumer Forum in the light of proposition laid down by Hon’ble National Commission in the above case. If such application is moved by revisionist before District Consumer Forum, District Consumer Forum shall pass appropriate order within 15 days keeping in view the proposition laid down by Hon’ble National Commission.

 

 

       (JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN)

        PRESIDENT

 

 

 

             (SMT. BAL KUMARI)

MEMBER

 

 

           

Sarika

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Bal Kumari]
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.