STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA  

                                                                Date of Instituion:11.12.2023

                    Date of final hearing:18.01.2024

                                                 Date of pronouncement:18.01.2024

Revision Petition No.100 of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF

Kotak Mahindra General Insurance Co. Ltd. Regd. Office 8^th Floor, Zonel IV, Kotak Infinity, Bldg, 21, Infinity IT Park Off WEH, Gen, AK Vaidya Marg, Dindoshi, Malad (E), Mumbai-400097, through its authorized signatory, Milind Myakal, Deputy Vice President (Legal), Kotak Mahindra General Insurance Co. Ltd. having its regional office at Zone IV, 8^th Floor, Infinity IT Park, A K Vaidya Marg, Malad (E), Mumbai-400097. .

                                                                                      .….Petitioner.

Through counsel Mr. Sachin Ohri, Advocate

Versus

Sandeep Kumar S/o Shri Mahender Singh, R/o Village-Kalyana, Tehsil & District, Charkhi Dadri, Haryana-127306

….Respondents.

CORAM:   S.P. Sood, Judicial Member.

Present:-    Mr. Sachin Ohri, counsel for the petitioner.

O R D E R

PER: S.P. SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

                   Present Revision Petition is preferred against the order dated  03.10.2023 in Consumer Complaint No.81 of 2023, passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Charkhi Dadri vide which the present petitioner-opposite party (‘OP’) was proceeded against ex-parte.

2.                The arguments have been advanced by Mr. Sachin Ohri, learned counsel for the petitioner. With his kind assistance the entire revision petition had also been properly perused and examined.

3.                While unfolding the arguments Mr. Sachin Ohri, learned counsel for the petitioner emphasized that summons were received by the present petitioner-opposite party-company but due to some inadvertence the same were placed by the dealing official of the present petitioner-opposite party company and that is why requisite instructions could not be sent to the counsel for the present petitioner-opposite party-company for appearance before the learned District Commission on 31.08.2023 however, he could not appear before the learned District Commission. On 03.11.2023 present petitioner-opposite party-company came to know that the present petitioner-opposite party-company has already been proceeded against ex-parte before learned District Commission on 03.10.2023 when present petitioner-opposite party-company checked the status of the case through online. Thereafter, review application was also filed before the learned District Commission for setting aside the order dated 03.10.2023, but the same was also dismissed vide order dated 16.11.2023. He further argued that non appearance of present petitioner before the learned District Commission was neither intentional nor willful and further prayed that order dated 03.10.2023, passed by learned District Commission may be set aside and present revision petition may be allowed.

4.                In view of the above submissions and careful perusal of the entire record, it is true that ex-parte proceedings were initiated before learned District Commission against the OP-present petitioner, but, it is golden principle of law that proper opportunity should be afforded to the concerned party before deciding the case on merits. The complainant is not going to suffer any irreparable loss if the present petitioner-OP is afforded an opportunity to defend themselves before the learned District Commission. So, in these circumstances, order dated 03.10.2023, passed by learned District Commission, Charkhi Dadri, vide which ex-parte proceedings initiated against OP-present petitioner is set-aside and the present revision petition is allowed subject to depositing of Rs.8,000/- as of costs to be paid by the present petitioner-OP to the complainant before learned district commission, Charkhi Dadri. Let, the petitioner-OP be afforded an opportunity to appear before learned District Commission and to file its reply as well as to lead its evidence etc. thereafter, the complaint be decided on merits.

5.                The petitioner is directed to appear before the learned District Commission, Charkhi Dadri on 19.01.2024 for further proceedings.

6.                This revision petition has been disposed of without issuing notice to the respondent with a view to imparting substantive justice to the parties and to save the huge expenses, which may be incurred by the respondent as also in order to avoid unnecessary delay in adjudication of the matter. In this regard, reliance can be placed on a Division Bench judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court rendered in Batala Machine Tools Workshop Cooperative Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur (CWP No.9563 of 2002) decided on June 27, 2002.

7.                Application(s), if any, is disposed off in terms of the aforesaid order.

8.                A copy of this order be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. This order be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.

9.                File be consigned to record room alongwith a copy of this order.

Pronounced on 18^th January, 2024     

                                                                                                            S.P. Sood                                                                                                                                        Judicial Member                                                                                                                             Addl. Bench-I