Heard the applicant (complainant) in person.  

The applicant/complainant states that he is in service of the Defence Department of the Government of India and he has been transferred from Chennai to Pune.  He had filed a complaint before the DCDRF Thiruvallur (hereinafter referred to as the District Commission) alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice in respect of a complaint relating to a SUV car manufactured by M/s Kia Motors.  The allegations regarding the deficiency in service were accepted by the District Commission and the complaint was allowed on 29.05.2023.  The applicant/complainant in person submits that the issue of unfair trade practice was left unattended by the District Commission as a result whereof no compensation has been allowed on that count and therefore the applicant/complainant being aggrieved filed First Appeal No. 816 of 2023 before the SCDRC Tamilnadu, Chennai (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission).  The judgment debtor/opposite party (non-applicant) also filed a cross appeal, being First Appeal No. 839 of 2023.  Both the appeals are pending in which notices have been issued and it is stated by the applicant/complainant that the opposite party has simply filed their vakalatnama and the matter has not been heard as yet.

On account of transfer to Pune, the applicant/complainant prays that the appeals be transferred to Pune (Circuit Bench of SCDRC Maharashtra) as he is not in a position to attend the hearings physically at Chennai.

The contention of the applicant/complainant may be a contingency which has arisen on account of his transfer but mere convenience may not be a ground for transferring both the appeals where the opposite party has also assailed the order passed by the District Commission before the concerned State Commission which has jurisdiction under the Act before it.

In the background above, the convenient facility of online hearing is available and the evidence thereof is not far to seek when the applicant/complainant is himself addressing this Bench online from far-off Pune.  The hearing is very effective and there is no impediment in connecting online in the hearing of cases.  In my considered opinion, the same facility can be availed of by the applicant/complainant at Chennai.  He alleges that such a hearing may not be effective as he may be required to be physically present for tendering of any documents.  The transfer as sought is of appeals and not of original complaint.  The appeals can be heard with the assistance of the record of the District Commission and therefore an effective hearing can be carried out even if the applicant/complainant is not physically present before the State Commission.

The transfer application is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the applicant/complainant to request the State Commission for an online hearing facility and the State Commission shall make arrangements accordingly on the request of the applicant/complainant for hearing of the appeals.

With the aforesaid observations, the transfer application is disposed of.