Delhi

North East

MA/3/2023

Sh. Anil Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

SD Motors - Opp.Party(s)

16 Jun 2023

ORDER

   DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

 M.A No. 03/23 in C.C No. 54/19

           

 In the matter of:

 

	Shri. Anil Kumar S/o Sh Rajpal Singh, R/o H.No. 85 Kallu Mohalla Grahi Sriniwas Puri East of Kailash Phase 1, Delhi At present: H.No. 77, Sharfuddinpur Javli Near Primary School Ghaziabad U.P	Complainant
	Versus
1.         2.	S.D Motors, 1/486 Main G.T Road, Dilshad Garden Delhi 110095   IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd., Through its Managing Director, Having Regd Office IFFCO Sadan C-1, District Centre, Saket New Delhi 110095	Opposite Parties

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Adarsh Nain, Member

 

ORDER

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

1. This order shall dispose off an application filed by the Complainant for recalling the order dated 07.12.2022 and restoration of the case. The brief facts for the disposal of this application are as under. The Complainant has filed a complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. Vide order dated 07.12.2022 the complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution. Thereafter, the Complainant has filed the present application for restoration of his complaint. We have already heard the Counsel for the Complainant and has perused the file. The case of the Applicant/Complainant is that the case was listed before the Lok Adalat on 14.11.2022. On that day, Complainant had appeared but none had appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party. It is the case of the Applicant that on that day i.e. on 14.11.2022 the case was adjourned for 07.12.2022. It is stated that on 07.12.2022 due to the communication gap between the Complainant and his Counsel no one could appear before this Commission and the case is dismissed for non-prosecution. The application is also accompanied by an application for condonation of delay in filing the application.
2. The perusal of the file shows that the case was listed before the Lok Adalat on 12.11.2022 whereas the Complainant has mentioned in the application that the case was listed before the Lok Adalat on 14.11.2022. The perusal of the file shows that on 12.11.2022 the Complainant was present and in his presence the matter was adjourned for 14.11.2022. This is a material contradiction. The perusal of the file shows that on 14.11.2022 none has appeared before this Commission on behalf of the Complainant. No explanation has been given as to why on 14.11.2022 the Complainant or his Counsel did not appear despite the fact that on 12.11.2022 the case was adjourned for 14.11.2022 in the presence of the Complainant. Then again on 07.12.2022 none has appeared on behalf of the Complainant and the case was dismissed for non-prosecution. The case/facts put forward by the Complainant/Applicant are contrary to the record. Even otherwise order can be review only if there is some error apparent on the face of the record and in the present case there is no such error apparent on the face of the record.
3. In view of the above discussion we do not find any merit in the application and the same is dismissed.
4. Order announced on 16.06.2023

               Copy of this order be given to the parties at free of cost

File be consigned to Record Room

(Adarsh Nain )           Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President