ORDER

Date of order:     28 -04-2017

Upendra Jha,Member       

                   This appeal is preferred against the order dated 04-03-2016 passed by the District Consumer Forum, East Champaran at Motihari in Complaint Case No. 64 of 2015 by which the complaint has been dismissed.

2.                Briefly stated the case of the appellant-complainant is that he is an unemployed youth. After taking loan from the respondent-Bank, he is running a Health Care Centre at Meerpur. He purchased a Machine for his Centre on payment of Rs. 2, 25,250/-(Rupees two lacs, twenty five thousand and two hundred fifty only) from the O.P.-respondent on 20-05-2014. The Microscope Machine was delivered to the appellant but it was found defective and it was not at all functional. He informed the respondent supplier for its functioning but the Machine never become functional. Lastly he filed a complaint before the District Forum. Despite notices, the O.P.-respondent did not appear. The District Forum passed the ex-party order against which this appeal is preferred.

3.                           Despite notices, the respondent could not appear. The appellant has filed written notes of arguments. The case was placed for ex-party hearing and after hearing posted for order on 27-01-2017. But, the respondent in the mean time has filed a Petition dated 08-02-2017 praying to allow him to file written arguments.

4.                           We have considered the submissions of the appellant, respondent- supplier Petition dated 08-02-2017 to permit him to file written notes of arguments and the order passed by the District Forum. It appears that the O.P.-1- respondent could not appear and contested the case before the District Forum. Similarly, the respondent Balaji Traders has filed a Petition praying to permit him to file written notes of arguments when the case was posted for order.  The respondent cannot be allowed to file written arguments at this stage.

5.                           On perusal of the order passed by the District Forum, it appears that the District Forum has not followed the procedures under section 13 (1) © to (g) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and has not obtained any expert/ technical report to substantiate the allegation of the complainant/appellant. It needs a fresh hearing of both parties. So, the appeal is allowed and remanded to the District Forum, East Champaran for fresh hearing of both sides, for taking evidence, expert/ technical report regarding defectness of the Machine and for passing a reasoned order within three months from the date of receipt of this order.

6.                           The appeal is allowed.

       S.K.Sinha                         Renu Sinha                  Upendra Jha                                                                      

      President                           Member (F)                   Member (M)

           Anita