Haryana

StateCommission

RP/130/2016

SCHINDLER INDIA PVT.LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SRI GURU SINGH SABHA - Opp.Party(s)

AJAY GOYAL

16 Feb 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

Revision Petition No:   130 of 2016

                                                Date of Institution:        21.12.2016

                                                Date of Decision :         16.02.2017

 

Schindler India Private Limited, having its registered office at : 401/402, Delphi, Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai-400076.

Also At : Unit No.B-417/20, Pacific Business Park, 4^th Floor, Plot No.1, Site 4, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, U.P. 201010.

                                      Petitioner-Opposite Party No.1

Versus

 

Sri Guru Singh Sabha (Regd.) Sector 15, Faridabad through its President Sh. Avtar Singh Khurana.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

 

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

                   Mr. Balbir Singh, Judicial Member.

                   Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member.

                                                                                                         

Present:     Shri Ajay Goyal, Advocate for petitioner.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

          By filing the present revision petition, Schindler India Private Limited-opposite party No.1 has challenged the order dated October 28^th, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad, (for short, ‘District Forum’), whereby application filed by the petitioner to set aside the order dated December 10^th, 2013 vide which the evidence of petitioner was closed, was dismissed. 

2.      Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that after closing of the evidence, nine adjournments were sought by the complainant to address the arguments.  The case is fixed for February 20^th, 2017 for arguments and the petitioner is only seeking one opportunity to tender the affidavit of petitioner on February 20^th, 2017.   

3.      Be that as it may and considering the golden principle that everyone approaching the temple of justice should feel satisfied in the matter of getting opportunity to present his or her case as good as he or she can, this revision petition is accepted and impugned order is set aside subject to the conditional cost of Rs.5000/-, to be paid to the complainant before the District Forum on the date fixed. The petitioner is accorded an opportunity to lead evidence.

4.      It is made clear that an opportunity is also afforded to the complainant to rebut the evidence led by the petitioner, in case it is required.

5.      This revision petition is disposed of without issuing notice to the respondent with a view to impart 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 Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur (CWP No.9563 of 2002) decided on June 27^th, 2002.

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

 

 

 

Announced 16.02.2017

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(Balbir Singh) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

UK