Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

RP/102/2022

Managing director & 2 ors - Complainant(s)

Versus

Suganya & 2 ors - Opp.Party(s)

K.R.mahesh

31 Jan 2023

ORDER

IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI - 3.

 

Present: Hon’ble Thiru Justice R.SUBBIAH  ... PRESIDENT

             Thiru.R VENKATESAPERUMAL        … MEMBER

 

Revision Petition No.102 of 2022

 

(Against the Order dated 13.06.2022 passed in C.C. No.26/2022 on the file of the DCDRC, Chennai (South))

 

                                                     Orders, dated:31.01.2023

1. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Pvt. Ltd,

(Now TVS Mobility Pvt. Limited),

Represented by its  Managing Director,

Having Regd. Office at:-

No.7 B, West Veli Street,

Madurai – 625 001.

 

2. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Pvt. Ltd.,

(Now TVS Mobility Pvt. Ltd.),

Authorized dealer for Ashok Leyland Vehicles,

Represented by its Manager,

Bye-Pass Road,

Poonamallee,

Chennai – 600 056.

 

3. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Pvt. Ltd.,

(Now TVS Mobility Pvt. Ltd.),

Authorized dealer for Ashok Leyland Vehicles,

Represented by its Manager,

No.82, SIDCO Industrial Estate,

Krishnagiri – 635 001.

 

4. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Pvt. Ltd.,

(Now TVS Mobility Pvt. Ltd.),

Authorized dealer for Ashok Leyland Vehicles,

Represented by its Manager,

Madhavaram Redhills Road,

Vadaperumbakkam,

Chennai – 600 060.

 

5. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Pvt. Ltd.,

(Now TVS Mobility Pvt. Ltd.),

Authorized dealer for Ashok Leyland Vehicles,

Represented by its Manager,

Nos.368 & 369, Mettupalayam Road,

Near TVS Tatabad,

Coimbatore – 641 043.

                             … Revision Petitioners / Opposite parties 2 to 6.

- Versus –

1. Mrs. Suganya,

W/o. Shivaji,

No.3, 2^nd Floor, VGK Nagar,

Madhavaram,

Chennai – 600 060.                       … 1^st Respondent /Complainant. 

 

2. Ashok Leyland Pvt. Ltd.,

Represented by its Managing Director,

Having Office at:

No.1, Sardar Patel Road,

Guindy,

Chennai – 600 032.               … 2^nd Respondent /1^st Opposite party. 

 

3. Rajesh Motors (mah) Pvt. Ltd.,

Main Dealer Ashok Leyland Vehicles,

Represented by its Manager,

No.101/ A 5, NR 4, Jai Mathur Housing Society,

Khed Chowk,

Maharastra Satara,

Maharastra – 415 001.        ... 3^rd Respondent / 7^th Opposite party.

For Revision Petitioners /

Opposite parties 1 to 5                             : M/s. K.R. Mahesh

For 1^st Respondent /Complainant            : M/s. K. Perumal

 

     This Revision Petition is listed today and, after hearing the arguments of the counsel for the Revision Petitioners and 1^st Respondent and upon perusing the materials on record, this Commission passes the following:-

 

O R D E R

R.Subbiah, J. – President.   (Open Court)

 

                This Revision Petition is filed against the Order, dated 13.06.2022, passed by the DCDRC, Chennai (South) in C.C. No.26/2022, whereby, the District Commission has set the Revision Petitioners herein / Opposite parties 2 to 6 exparte for non-filing of written version within the statutory period of 45 days and consequently, adjourned the Case to 20.06.2022 for filing written version of the 7^th opposite party.

2.     Heard the Revision Petitioners / Opposite parties 2 to 6 and the 1^st respondent / complainant.  There was no representation for the  respondent Nos.2 & 3 / Opposite party Nos.1 & 7.

 

3.     This Revision Petitioners / Opposite parties 2 to 6 were set exparte for non-filing of written version within the statutory period of 45 days.  When the matter had come up before this Commission, the Learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioners / Opposite parties 2 to 6 submitted that as per the order dt.06.12.2021 of the Hon’ble NCLT, Chennai Bench, the opposite party company was demerged and its business was transferred to a new company and without incorporating the new company, the opposite parties 2 to 6 were not able to file their written version.   In the mean while, the opposite parties 2 to 6 were set exparte on 13.06.2022.  Hence, the Revision Petitioners / Opposite parties 2 to 6 pray for setting aside the exparte order dated:13.06.2022.  When that being the position, we are of the opinion that keeping the Revision Petition filed by the Opposite parties 2 to 6 pending will further delay the matter.  Since the reasons assigned by the Opposite parties 2 to 6 seem to be bonafide and also, in the interests of justice, we are inclined to allow this Revision Petition by setting aside the impugned order.

4. In the result, the Revision Petition is allowed and the impugned order, dated 13.06.2022, passed in C.C. No.26/2022 by the DCDRC, Chennai (South) in setting the Revision Petitioners/Opposite Parties 2 to 6 exparte is set aside, and the Opposite Parties 2 to 6 shall file their Versions, Proof Affidavits and the documents/exhibits on their side, if any, in C.C. No.26/2022 on the next date of hearing without fail, whereupon, the District Commission shall proceed with the case in accordance with law, for its early disposal.

 

 

 

R VENKATESAPERUMAL                                     R.SUBBIAH, J.

MEMBER                                                                  PRESIDENT.

 

 

KIR/TNSCDRC/Chennai/Orders/January/2023.