Haryana

StateCommission

RP/2/2023

JANA SMALL FINANCE BANK LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNIK - Opp.Party(s)

GAGANDEEP TONI

17 Jan 2023

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

                  

  Date of Instituion:03.01.2023

                Date of final hearing:17.01.2023

                                                Date of pronouncement: 17.01.2023

 

Revision Petition No.02 of 2023

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF

 

Jana Small Finance Bank Ltd., the Fairway Ground Floor, Domlur, Kormangala, Inner Ring Road, Banglore, 560071 through their local address of Jana Small Finance Bank Limited, Ground Floor, Pipli Road, Kurukshetra, Haryana through its Authority representative Gaurav Gautam.

                                                                                       .….Petitioner.

Through counsel Mr. Manu Gupta, Advocate

 

Versus

 

Unik aged 22 years, son of Shri Jagdish Chand, R/o House No.734/2, Kumharon Wali Gali, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra, Haryana.

….Respondent.

 

CORAM:   S.P.Sood, Judicial Member.

                   S.C. Kaushik, Member.

 

Present:-    Mr. Manu Gautam, counsel for the petitioner.

 

O R D E R

S. P. SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

           

                    Delay of 126 days in filing of the present revision petition is hereby condoned for the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay.

2.                Present Revision Petition is preferred against the order dated  12.05.2022 in Consumer Complaint No.136 of 2022, passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kurukshetra, vide which the present petitioner-opposite party (‘OP’) was proceeded against ex-parte.

3.                The arguments have been advanced by Mr. Manu Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. With his kind assistance the entire revision petition had also been properly perused and examined.

4.                While unfolding the arguments Mr. Manu Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner emphasized that on 12.05.2022, the complaint was fixed before learned District Commission, but learned counsel for present petitioner-OP noted the wrong date i.e. 13.05.2022 instead of  12.05.2022 and accordingly the present petitioner was proceeded against ex-parte before learned District Commission. Thereafter, review application was also filed before the learned District Commission for setting aside the order dated 12.05.2022, but the same was also dismissed vide order dated 28.07.2022. He further argued that the present petitioner came to know about the order dated 28.07.2022 only on 14.12.2022, when they received the certified copy of said order. He further argued that non appearance of present petitioner before the learned District Commission was neither intentional nor willful and further prayed that order dated 12.05.2022, passed by learned District Commission may be set aside and present revision petition may be allowed.

5.                In view of the above submissions and careful perusal of the entire record, it is true that ex-parte proceedings were initiated before learned District Commission against the OP-present petitioner, 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 is afforded an opportunity to defend themselves before the learned District Commission. So, in these circumstances, orders dated 12.05.2022, passed by learned District Commission, Kurukshetra, vide which ex-parte proceedings initiated against OP- present petitioner is set-aside and the present revision petition is allowed without any order of costs. Let, the petitioner be afforded an opportunity to appear before learned District Commission and to file its reply as well as to lead its evidence etc. thereafter, the complaint be decided on merits.

6.                The petitioner is directed to appear before the learned District Commission, Kurukshetra tomorrow itself i.e. 18.01.2023 for further proceedings.

7.                This revision petition has been disposed of without issuing notice to the respondent 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.

8.                Application(s), if any, is disposed off in terms of the aforesaid order.

9.                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.

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

 

Pronounced on 17^th January, 2023

                                                                                                            S.P.Sood

                                                                                                            Judicial Member                                                                                                                 Addl. Bench            

 

         

                                                                                                            S.C. Kaushik                                                                                                                        Member                                                                                                                                 Addl. Bench

           

 

R.K.