Delhi

StateCommission

A/657/2014

MANOJ KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

TREHUN SONS - Opp.Party(s)

23 Jul 2014

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION DELHI
Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
 
First Appeal No. A/657/2014
(Arisen out of Order Dated 05/06/2014 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/168/2014 of District West Delhi)
 
1. MANOJ KUMAR
HOUSE No.18, GALI No 03, TIKRI KALAN EXTENSION NEW DELHI-110041.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. TREHUN SONS
WZ-442, MADIPUR, NEW DELHI-110063.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONABLE MRS. Salma Noor PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'ABLE MR. JUSTICE N.P KAUSHIK MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:
For the Respondent:
ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

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

 

                      Date of Decision:  23.7.2014

                                                                                           

First Appeal – 657/2014

                                                   

 

Manoj Kumar

Hous No.18, Gali No.3,

Tikri Kalan Extension,

New Delhi-110 041

 

 

 

     .........Appellant

VS

 

 

 

         

          Delhi Trehun Sons (16194900)

          WZ-442, Madipur, New Delhi

        

 

 

………...Respondent       

 

CORAM

SALMA NOOR, MEMBER

 

1.   Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment? 

2.   To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

SALMA NOOR(MEMBER)

 

1.                    In a complaint case bearing No.168/2014 titled as Manoj Kumar Vs. Delhi Trehun Sons filed before District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-III, Janak Puri, New Delhi, Complainant had not put his appearance on 5.6.2014, and the Forum dismissed the complainant in complainant’s default.

2.        In the present appeal before this Commission, complainant has prayed for setting aside the orders dated 5.6.2014 passed by the District Forum.

3.         We have heard Appellant in person in this appeal at the admission stage itself.

4.         The version of the complainant for non-appearance on 5.6.2014 in the case before the Forum is that he was reached before the Forum only for two minutes late, hence default occurred.

5.         We do not find any reason for not believing the version of the complainant/appellant.  Policy of law is not to stile a contest.  In such circumstances lenient view is required to be taken so as to allow the complaint and the matter may be decided on merit. We, therefore, allow the appeal setting aside the dismissal orders dated 5.6.2014 and remand the case back to District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-III, Janak Puri, New Delhi, with a direction to restore the complaint to its original number, and to proceed in the case according to law.  The Appellant Complainant is directed to appear before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal -III, Janak Puri, New Delhi, on 25.8.2014.

5.         Copy of this order be sent to District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-III, Janak Puri, New Delhi for information and to keep it on record and compliance and a copy of this order be transmitted to both the parties.

 

                                                                                                              

         

 

 

 
 
[HONABLE MRS. Salma Noor]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[HON'ABLE MR. JUSTICE N.P KAUSHIK]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.