Delhi

StateCommission

A/562/2016

M/S PAWAN GOODS FRIEGHT CARRIER - Complainant(s)

Versus

SHRIRAM GENERAL INSU. CO. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

VINOD KUMAR ARORA

23 Nov 2017

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

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

 

Date of Decision :  23.11.2017

 

First Appeal No. 562/2016

(Arising out of the order dated 29.09.2016 passed in Complaint Case No.167/2015 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (North-West), Delhi.

 

In the matter of :

 

M/S. PAWAN GOODS FREIGHT CARRIER,

THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR,

TAR PAWAN KUMAR SANDHIR,

FLIGHT OWNER AND TRANSPORT CONTRACTOR

OFFICE  AT 16, KHANNA MARKET,

TIS HAZARI COURT, DELHI                                                             .......  APPELLANT

 

VERSUS

 

SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

B-08, UNIT NO. 402 & 403, GD ITL TOWER,

NETAJI SUBHASH PLACE,

PITAMPURA,

NEW DELHI-110034.                                                                   ........ RESPONDENT

 

CORAM

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President

Ms. Salma Noor, Member

 

1. Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgement?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President

 

 

1. This is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), wherein challenge is made to the order dated 17.08.2016 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (North-West), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as  the “District Forum”) in CC No.167/2015 by which the Ld. District Forum has dismissed the complaint filed by the appellant /complainant for non-appearance.

 

2. The reasons for non-appearance are given as under :-

 

 

That thereafter the matter was fixed on 11.05.2016 the respondent has filed written statement and thereafter the matter was fixed for compromise, if any, on 04.08.2016 and also for filing evidence affidavit and replication, if any.

 

That thereafter the matter was listed on 04.08.2016 and counsel for  the petitioner could not appear before the Ld. Forum as he was not well and also his old mother aged about 90 years was suffering various ailments  and counsel for the petitioner was engaged to take care of his old mother. However, the counsel for the petitioner instructed to the petitioner to appear before the Ld. Forum but due to legal illiteracy the petitioner could not appear before the Ld. Forum when the matter was called for hearing and the Ld. Forum was pleased an order for dismiss in default as none was appeared before the Ld. Forum on 29.09.2016.

 

            After going through the reasoning given in the application, we find that there are sufficient reasons due to which appearance could not made before the District Forum. Accordingly, we accept the appeal and set aside the order dated 29.09.2016 and restore the complaint to its original position.

 

            Appellant/complainant is warned to be cautious in future.

 

            Let parties to appear in District Forum on 23.01.2018.  The District Forum shall proceeded further in the matter in accordance with law.

 

            Copy of this order be sent to the parties as well as to the Ld. District Forum for necessary information.

 

            File be consigned to Record Room.        

(Justice Veena Birbal)

President

 

(Salma Noor)

      Member