Haryana

StateCommission

RP/51/2017

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GEN.INSURANCE CO. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SATISH KUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

SACHIN OHRI

21 Jun 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

 

         

                                       

Revision Petition No  :  51 of 2017

Date of Institution:        24.05.2017

Date of Decision :         21.06.2017

 

 

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, GE Plaza, Airport Road, Yearwada, Pune having Branch Office at SCO 156-159, 2^nd Floor, Sector 9C, Chandigarh through Authorized Signatory Navjeet Singh, Assistant Manager Legal.

                                      Petitioner-Opposite Party

Versus

 

Satish Kumar son of Deva Ram, resident of Village and Post Office Kasan, Tehsil and District Kaithal.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri Balbir Singh, Judicial Member.

                                               

                                                                            

Present:               Shri Sachin Ohri, Advocate for petitioner.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J, (ORAL)

 

          The instant revision petition has been filed by Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited-opposite party (petitioner herein) against the orders dated February 02^nd and April 24^th, 2017 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kaithal (for short, ‘District Forum’) whereby the petitioner was proceeded ex parte and it’s application for setting aside ex parte order was dismissed respectively.

2.      Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that petitioner was never served upon.  The impugned order be set aside; opportunity be granted to the petitioner to file written version and contest the complaint.  The next date of hearing before the District Forum is July 13^th, 2017.

3.      Notice of the complaint was issued to the petitioner.  Petitioner was proceeded ex parte by the District Forum vide impugned order observing as under:-

          “Summon issued to OP No.3 received back with the report of process served ‘served’.  Summons were issued to the Ops No.1 and 2 through registered post on 23.12.2016.  Postal article issued to Ops No.1 and 2 not received back with served or unserved.  A period of one month has been lapsed, which means that the summons issued to Ops No.1 and 2 through registered post would have been served upon the OPs No.1 and 2.  Despite repeated calls since morning, none has put in appearance on behalf of the Ops.  It is already 3.00 P.M.  So, all the three OPs are hereby proceeded ex parte.  Now, the case is adjourned to 02.03.2017 for ex parte evidence of complainant.”

 

4.      Perusal of order shows that the District Forum proceeded ex parte against the petitioner, as notice of the complaint not received back served or unserved and more than one month had passed.  Thus, it becomes clear that on the presumption of service, the District Forum proceeded ex parte against the petitioner. It is always better to decide the matter on merits, irrespective of the technicalities or formalities on the part of either party, this Commission is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if an opportunity is granted to the petitioner to file written version and contest the complaint.   

5.      Accordingly, this revision petition is accepted and the impugned order is set aside. Consequently, the petitioner is accorded opportunity to file written version and join the proceedings.

6.      This revision petition is disposed of without issuing notice to the respondents with a view to impart substantive justice to the parties and to save the huge expenses, which may be incurred by the respondents 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 Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur (CWP No.9563 of 2002) decided on June 27^th, 2002.

7.      The petitioner is directed to appear before the District Forum, on July 13^th, 2017, the date already fixed.

8.      Copy of this order be sent to the District Forum.

 

 

Announced 21.06.2017

(Balbir Singh) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

UK