Delhi

StateCommission

RP/66/2016

SPICE JET LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SHAMIK NAG - Opp.Party(s)

AMIT PUNJ

25 Jul 2016

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

 

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

Date of Decision :25.07.2016

Revision Petition No. 66/2016

 

(Arising out of the order dated 23.11.15 passed in Complaint Case No. 906/15 passed by the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum (North-West), Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi.)

 

In the matter of

 

SPICEJET LTD.

319, UDYOG VIHAR PHASE-IV

GURGAON, HARYANA

THROUGH SH. VIJAY ROY,

SR. MANAGER LEGAL

……Petitioner

 

Versus

 

SHAMIK NAG

J-D, 16-D, SFS FLATS

DAKSHINI PITAM PURA

NEW DELHI-110034

…Respondent

 

 

CORAM

Justice Veena Birbal, President

Salma Noor, Member

1.         Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?

2.         To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President

 

1. By way of this petition challenge is made to order dated 23.11.15 by which the petitioner herein i.e. OP before the District Forum has been proceeded ex-parte.
2.             Ld. Counsel for the petitioner/OP has submitted that due to non appearance on 23.11.15, the Ld. District Forum has proceeded the case ex-parte against the petitioner/OP. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner/OP submits that the petitioner/OP received the notice from the District  Forum wherein the next date for appearance was 1.12.15. It is stated on 1.12.15 when the Counsel for the petitioner/OP went to the District Forum with Vakalatnama and necessary documents, he was informed that the case was listed on 23.11.15 and the staff informed him the next date of the case as 6.1.16. It is stated that on 6.1.16 the Counsel for the petitioner/OP again went to attend the case, he come to know that he has already been proceeded ex-parte on 23.11.15. It is stated that the petitioner/OP was proceeded ex-parte as he had no knowledge of said date.
3. Respondent has opposed the petition and stated that the non appearance was deliberate.
4.             We have heard the parties and perused the material on record including relevant order which is produced as under:-

“Date:- 20.08.2015

Present :- Counsel/Applicant/Complainant in person.

            Heard. Admitted. Be Registered as C.C/EC/Misc. Issue Notice to OP(s)/JD by Regd. Post/speed post. Come up for 1.12.2015.

 

MEMBER                                            MEMBER                    PRESIDENT

 

Date:- 20.10.2015

Present :- Complainant in person.

                 None for OP

                  The complainant has filed proof of service to come up for F. proceeding on 23.11.2015.

                                    SD/-                                                     SD/-

 

Date:- 23.11.2015

Present :- Complainant in person.

                 None for OP

                  Complainant was filed proof of service but none present.

                   To come up for ex-parte evidence and ex-parte argument on                                   6.1.16.

                                           SD/-                                                          SD/-
Date:- 6/1/16

Present :- Complainant in person.

Complainant filed affidavit.  To come up for argument on  29.3.16.

                                           SD/-                                                          SD/-”

 

5.             The perusal of order sheets shows that on the day the complaint was admitted, the notice was issued to petitioner/OP for 1.12.15 and there is no date of 20.10.15 or 23.11.15. It is surprising when the notice was issued for 1.12.15, how the case was taken up on 20.10.15 and 23.11.15.
6.             In these circumstances Ld. District Forum has committed illegality in proceeding ex-parte against the petitioner/OP.
7.             In view of above, we allow this petition and set aside the impugned order dated 23.11.15 and give an opportunity to the petitioner/OP to contest the case on merits.
8.             Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner/OP states that he was not being supplied with the copy of the complainant.
9.             Let the parties appear before the Ld. District Forum on the aforesaid date. 8.8.2016.
10.             On the said date Ld. District Forum shall supply the copy of the complaint to the petitioner/OP and thereupon Ld. District Forum in accordance with law shall give him time to file the written statement. Thereafter, the District Forum shall proceed further in the matter in accordance with the law.
11.             The revision petition stands allowed.
12.             A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the District Forum-(North-West) Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi.

            File be consigned to Record Room.

 (Justice Veena Birbal)

President

                                                              

 

(Salma Noor)

Member