Haryana

StateCommission

RP/118/2016

IDEA CELLULAR LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SEEMA CHAUDHARY - Opp.Party(s)

VISHAL GUPTA

09 Dec 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

Revision Petition No.   118 of 2016

Date of Institution:       08.12.2016

Date of Decision:         09.12.2016

 

1.      Idea Cellular Limited, having its Registered Office, Suman Tower, Plot No.18, Sector 11, Ghandhi Nagar, Gujarat and Punjab Circle Head Office at Plot No.C-105, Industrial Area, Phase-7, SAS Nagar (Mohali) through its Authorized Signatory.

 

2.      Idea Cellular Store DSS 305, Sector 20, Panchkula (Haryana) through its Authorized Signatory.

…….Petitioners-Opposite Parties

 

Versus

 

Seema Chaudhary W/o Sh. Amardeep Chaudhary, R/o # 153, Sector 2, Panchkula.

……Respondent-Complainant

 

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

                   Ms. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.

                         

Present:     Mr. Amit Gupta, counsel for the petitioners.   

                            

O R D E R

 

 NAWAB SINGH J, (ORAL)

          The instant revision petition has been filed by Idea Cellular Limited and another-opposite parties against the order dated October 31^st, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Panchkula (for short ‘District Forum’), whereby, petitioners were proceeded ex parte.

2.      Learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that the impugned order be set aside because the petitioners were never served upon. The next date of hearing before the District Forum is January 01^st, 2017.

3.      Notice of the complaint was issued to the petitioners. The District Forum proceeded ex parte the petitioners by observing as under:-

“As per report of the concerned Assistant, notice was issued to the Ops No.1 and 2 through registered post on 28.09.2016 and the same has not been received served or unserved. Despite passing of 30 days from the issuance of notice to Ops No.1 and 2, it is deemed to be served. Case called several times since morning. It is already 4 P.M. But there is no appearance on behalf of Ops No.1 and 2. It seems that Ops No.1 and 2 are not interested to defend their case. Hence, the Ops No.1 and 2 are hereby proceeded ex-parte. Now to come up on 24.11.2016 for filing evidence of the complainant.”

 

4.      Perusal of record reveals that on October 31^st, 2016, the District Forum proceeded ex parte against the petitioners, as notice of the complaint never served upon petitioners 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 petitioners. 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 petitioners to file written version and contest the complaint.   

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

6.      The petitioners are directed to appear before the District Forum, on January 01^st, 2017, the date already fixed.

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

 

December 09th 2016

Urvashi Agnihotri Member

Nawab Singh President

D.R.