Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

RP/21/1

M/S BAJAJ FINANCE LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SHANKAR YADUVANSHI - Opp.Party(s)

SH.PRANAY GUPTA

28 Nov 2022

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

                   PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

                    

                            REVISION PETITION NO. 01 OF 2021

(Arising out of order dated 13.11.2019 passed in C.C.No.144/2019 by the District Commission, Chhindwara)  

 

BAJAJ FINANCE LIMITED,

REGISTERED OFFICE-MUMBAI PUNE ROAD,

AKURDI, PUNE-411 035 (MAHARASHTRA)

THROUGH THE BRANCH MANAGER,

BRANCH OFFICE AT NO.202, SECOND FLOOR,

KHATWANI COMPLEX, 75-76 GOL BAZAR,

JABALPUR-482 002 (M.P.)                                                                         …          PETITIONER.

 

                         VERSUS

1. SHANKAR YADUVANSHI,

    S/O LATE ASHOK YADUVANSHI,

    R/O NEWTON ROAD, CHANDAMETA,

    TEHSIL-PARASIA, DISTRICT-CHHINDWARA (M.P.)

 

2. HDFC STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE CO.LTD.

    PARASIA ROAD, CHHINDWARA (MP)

    THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER.

 

3. HDFC LIFE INSURANCE CO.LTD,

    11^TH FLOOR, LODHA AXILAY APOLO

     MILL COMPOUND, N.M.JOSHI ROAD,

     MAHALAXMI, MUMBAI-400 011

     THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER.                                                   …         RESPONDENTS.

 

BEFORE:

                  HON’BLE SHRI A. K. TIWARI                  :   PRESIDING MEMBER

                  HON’BLE DR. SRIKANT PANDEY          :   MEMBER

                  HON’BLE SHRI D. K. SHRIVASTAVA     :   MEMBER

                 

COUNSEL FOR PARTIES:

                 Shri Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner.

                 None for the respondents.

O R D E R

(Passed On 28.11.2022)

                                The following order of the Commission was delivered by A. K. Tiwari, Presiding Member:   

                                       

                       The opposite party no.1/petitioner has filed this revision petition against the order dated 13.11.2019 passed in C.C.No.144/2019 by the

-2-

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhindwara (For short ‘District Commission) whereby the petitioner was proceeded ex-parte.

2.                The facts relevant for disposal of this revision are that after service of notice of complaint, the petitioner/opposite party no.1 failed to appear before the District Commission on 13.11.2019, therefore an order to proceed ex-parte was passed against it.  Challenging the said order the opposite party no. 1 has preferred the present revision on the ground that the petitioner could not get an opportunity to put their case/defense before the District Commission. 

3.                Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no.1/complainant has mentioned the address of the petitioner/opposite party no.1 in the complaint as “M/S Bajaj Finance Private Company Limited, Lal Bag Road, Vishal Mart ke upar, Tehsil and District Chhindwara” whereas at the given address there is no office of the petitioner/opposite party no.1. Thus, the petitioner was not properly served and therefore, the petitioner failed to appear before the District Commission on 13.11.2019 and the District Commission has wrongly proceeded ex-parte against it.  He further submits that if the impugned order is not set-aside, the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss.

4.                None appeared for the complainant/respondent no.1 as also the opposite party no.2 & 3/respondent no.2 & 3.

-3-

5.                The question arises that whether petitioner should be granted an opportunity to defend their case before the District Commission since they were proceeded ex-parte on 13.11.2019. 

6.                We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the record we find that the address of the petitioner /opposite party no.1 given in the complaint is “M/S Bajaj Finance Private Company Limited, Lal Bag Road, Vishal Mart ke upar, Tehsil and District Chhindwara” whereas the correct address of the petitioner’s Chhindwara Branch Office’s postal address is “M/S Bajaj Finance Limited, 1^st Floor, Karan Arcade, Near ICICI Bank, Parasia Road, Chhindwara M.P.” which the petitioner has mentioned in the revision petition.  It means that the complainant has not correctly mentioned the address of the opposite party no.1/petitioner in the complaint.  Therefore, the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner has force that the complainant has wrongly mentioned the address of the opposite party no.1/petitioner in the complaint.

7.                From the notice regarding service on opposite party no.1/petitioner placed in record of the District Commission we find that the notice was sent to wrong address, it was refused to accept the same, and therefore, the District Commission holding that the notice on opposite party no.1/petitioner deemed served, proceeded ex-parte against it.

-4-

8.                In revision, this Commission can interfere with the orders only if it appears that the District Commission below has exercised jurisdiction not vested in it by law or has failed to exercise jurisdiction so vested or has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.  From the record it is established that the notice was not properly served on the opposite party no.1/petitioner as per provisions of the Consumer Protection Act and we find that the District Commission has therefore committed error while proceeding the opposite party no.1 /petitioner ex-parte.

9.                In view of the above discussion and under facts and circumstances of the case we find that the impugned order cannot be sustained and deserves to be set-aside.

10.              In the result, the impugned order proceeding ex-parte against the petitioner/opposite party no.1 is set-aside. The Revision Petition is allowed.

11.              Parties are directed to appear before the District Commission on 30.12.2022.

12.              The complainant shall provide copy of complaint along with affidavit and documents to the opposite party no.1 on the date of appearance. The opposite party no.1/petitioner shall file reply to the

 

-5-

complaint positively within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of complaint and documents.

13.              The District Commission is directed to proceed further in the matter in accordance with law.

 

         (A. K. Tiwari)    (Dr. Srikant Pandey)   (D. K. Shrivastava)

    Presiding Member           Member                     Member