STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

First Appeal No.    206 of 2015

Date of Institution:  03.03.2015

Date of Decision:   13.05.2015

Gulzar Ali aged 50 years son of Sh. Ali Mohammad, resident of Village Khandara, Tehsil Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar (Haryana).

                                      Appellant-Complainant

Versus

1.      Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Limited, having registered office at 123, Angabba Naicken Street, Chennai.

2.      Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Limited, Opposite Raghu Nath Mandir, Near Lal Dwara, Jagadhari, Yamuna Nagar, through its Branch Manager.

3.      M/s Jagdambey Trading Centre, Panjlasa Road, Naraingarh, District Ambala (Authorized Dealer of Sonalika Tractor).

                             Respondents-Opposite Parties

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

                   Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                   Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member.

Present:     Shri Lavish Arora, Advocate for the appellant.

                   Shri Jai Singh, Advocate for the respondents No.1 & 2.

                   Shri Nitin Gupta, Advocate for the respondent No.3.

O R D E R

 NAWAB SINGH J, (ORAL)

The instant appeal has been filed by Gulzar Ali–complainant against the order dated January 19^th, 2015 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short ‘District Forum’), Yamuna Nagar, whereby, the complaint was dismissed in default.

2.      Complainant filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short ‘the Act’), before the District Forum alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties (respondents herein).

3.         Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that he wrongly noted the date as January 23^rd, 2015 instead of January 19^th, 2015 due to which he could not appear on the date fixed and complaint was dismissed in default. 

4.      He further urged that the impugned order be set aside and complaint be restored at its original number.

5.         The purpose of the law is to secure the ends of justice. The laws are not ends in themselves but are only a means for securing justice. It is settled principle of law that contest and decision on merits is always better course unless the concerned party is extremely negligent or the conduct shows a will not to pursue the complaint, dismissal in default shall not subserve the cause of justice.  No such eventuality seems to be there which will exhibit extreme negligence or a will not to pursue the complaint. Therefore, this Commission deems it appropriate to restore the complaint of the complainant. 

6.       Accordingly, the appeal is accepted and the order dated January 19^th, 2015 is set-aside.  The complaint is restored at its original number.

7.      The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum on July 02^nd, 2015.

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

UK