STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

  Date of Instituion:22.11.2022

                Date of final hearing:09.12.2022

                                                Date of pronouncement: 04.01.2023

Revision Petition No.81 of 2022

IN THE MATTER OF

1.      The Zonal Head, Zonal Office Uco Bank, Durga Mandir Complex, 1^st Floor, Old G.T. Road, Near Bus Stand, Karnal-132001.

                                                                                      .….Petitioner

Through counsel Mr. Surender Singh Duhan, Advocate

Versus

1.    Mrs. Sona Devi, age 56 years w/o Sh. Shri Subhash, R/o Buda Khera, Tehsil Sfidon, District Jind.

….Respondent No.1.

2.    The Manager, Uco Bank, Budha Khera Branch, Teshil Safidon, District Jind.

3.    The Manager, Future Generali, 3^rd Floor, City View, SCO-16, Sector-29, Gurugaon, Haryana, Pin Code-122002, What’s app No.7678006000, E-mail: Proforma Respondents No.2 & 3.

CORAM:   S.P.Sood, Judicial Member.

                   S.C. Kaushik, Member.

Present:-    Mr. Surender Singh Duhan, counsel for the petitioner.

O R D E R

S. P. SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

                    Present Revision Petition is preferred against the order dated  08.09.2022 in Consumer Complaint No.142 of 2022, passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jind, vide which opposite party (‘OP’) No.2- present petitioner was proceeded against ex-parte.

2.                The arguments were advanced by Mr. Surender Singh Duhan, learned counsel for the petitioner and with his kind assistance contests of the revision petition has also been properly perused and examined.

3.                While unfolding the arguments, it has been argued by Mr. Surender Singh Duhan, learned counsel for the petitioner that the present petitioner will suffer an irreparable loss and injury in case the impugned order dated 08.09.2022 is not set-aside. He further argued that abovementioned complaint was presented before learned District Commission on 06.05.2022 and notice was issued for 08.09.2022. However, on 08.09.2022, ex-parte proceedings were initiated against OP No.2-present petitioner while observing that “notice issued to OP No.2 not received back either served or unserved and mandatory period of 30 days had expired. So, it was presumed that service was duly effected, which of course is not always legal, whereas the fact of the matter was that OP No.2 has never received the notice of this complaint. This is how the non appearance of present petitioner-OP No.2, before learned District Commission was neither intentional nor willful, but was due to wrong date noted by its counsel so the order dated 08.09.2022 may be set aside and present revision petition may please be allowed.

4.                In view of the above submissions and careful perusal of the entire record, it is true that the defence of opposite party-present petitioner was proceeded against ex-parte by learned District Commission vide order dated 08.09.2022 by raising the presumptions U/o 5 Rule 20(A) of the CPC, but, it is golden principle of law that proper opportunity should be afforded to the concerned party before deciding the case on merits. The complainant is not going to suffer any irreparable loss if the present petitioner-OP No.2 is afforded an opportunity to defend itself before the learned District Commission. So, in these circumstances, orders dated 08.09.2022, passed by learned District Commission, Jind, vide which ex-pare proceedings were initiated against the present petitioner-OP No.2 are hereby set-aside and the present revision petition is allowed. Let, the petitioner be afforded an opportunity to file its reply and to lead its evidence etc. thereafter, the complaint be decided on merits.

5.                The petitioner is directed to appear before the learned District Commission, Jind on 09.01.2023 for further proceedings.

6.                This revision petition has been disposed of without issuing notice to the respondents with a view to imparting substantive justice to the parties and to save the huge expenses, which may be incurred by the respondent as also in order to avoid unnecessary delay in adjudication of the matter. In this regard, reliance can be placed on a Division Bench judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court rendered in Batala Machine Tools Workshop Cooperative Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur (CWP No.9563 of 2002) decided on June 27, 2002.

7.                Copy of this order be sent to the learned District Commission, Jind.

8.                A copy of this order be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. This order be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.

9.                Application(s), pending, if any, stands disposed off in terms of the aforesaid order.

10.              File be consigned to record room alongwith a copy of this order.

Pronounced on 04^th January, 2023                                                                                                                                                                                          S.P.Sood

                                                                                                            Judicial Member                                                                                                                 Addl. Bench            

                                                                                                            S.C. Kaushik                                                                                                                        Member                                                                                                                                 Addl. Bench

R.K.