NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/1931/2018

GAURAV BANSAL & 2 ORS. - Complainant(s)

Versus

UTTAR PRADESH TRADE TAX DEPARTMENT & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. RAJIV YADAV & MS. PALLAVI PRATAP

06 May 2019

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 1931 OF 2018
 
(Against the Order dated 09/01/2018 in Appeal No. 285/2017 of the State Commission Uttar Pradesh)
1. GAURAV BANSAL & 2 ORS.
S/O. LT. SRI SURENDERA BANSAL, R/O. HOUSE NO. S-6, AUTHORITY STAFF COLONY, BLOCK-A, SECTOR BETA 1, GREATER NOIDA
GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR
UTTAR PRADESH
2. SAURABH BANSAL
S/O. LT. SRI SURENDRA BANSAL, R/O. 349A, BANSAL BHAWAN, NEAR BANSAL PAINTS JARCHA NTPC ROAD, DADRI
GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR
UTTAR PRADESH
3. ROHIT BANSAL
S/O. LT. SRI SURENDRA BANSAL, R/O. 349A, BANSAL BHAWAN, NEAR BANSAL PAINTS JARCHA NTPC ROAD, DADRI
GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR
UTTAR PRADESH
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. UTTAR PRADESH TRADE TAX DEPARTMENT & ANR.
THROUGH ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(PRATHAM) KHAND-1,VOGAN VILA MARKET SECTOR GAMMA-1 GREATER NOIDA
GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR,
UTTAR PRADESH
2. I.C.I.C.I LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
THROUGH ITS MANAGER, SATYA BUSINESS PARK, 2ND FLOOR, 43/15, NAVAL KISHORE ROAD, HAZARATGANJ,
LUCKNOW
UTTTAR PRADESH
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA,PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. C. VISWANATH,MEMBER

For the Petitioner :
Mr. Rajiv Yadav, Advocate
For the Respondent :
Mr. Mayank Singhal, Asstt.
Commissioner for R-1
Mr. Atul Nigam, Advocate with
Mr. Randhir Kumar and Mr. Anubhav Tyagi, Advocates

Dated : 06 May 2019
ORDER

ORAL

Heard on merits.

It is argued on behalf of the Petitioners that their Counsel could not appear on the date 09.01.2018 on account of the fact that he was elevated to the High Court of Allahabad on 22.09.2017 and that the Petitioners were not aware of this fact, till they received copy of this order, that their Counsel could not appear on the date fixed before the State Commission.  It is submitted that the Counsel of the petitioners could not appear on earlier two

-2-

consecutive dates and the Petitioners should not be made to suffer on account of fault of their Counsel; that the case was being proceeded with in Lucknow while the Petitioners are settled in NOIDA and for that reason they could not be able to contact their Counsel frequently.

It is argued by learned Counsel appearing for Respondent no.2 that on two occasions, i.e., 13.02.2017 and 21.06.2017, none appeared on behalf of the Petitioners and that the Commission had acted diligently and dismissed the Appeal when none had again appeared on behalf of the Petitioners on the 3rd date.  It is submitted that there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order.

Assistant Commissioner of Respondent No.1 also adopted the arguments of learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2. 

We have heard the arguments and perused the material on record.

There is no doubt that the Petitioners had not attended proceedings before the State Commission on 13.02.2017 and 21.06.2017 and finally on 3rd consecutive date, the State Commission by the impugned order dismissed in default the

 

-3-

application of the Petitioners seeking condonation of delay and consequently, the Appeal.

It is a settled law that the parties should be diligent in perusing their case.  However, in the interest of justice and following the principle that it is better that the matter should be disposed of on merits, the impugned order is hereby set aside on payment of costs of ₹30,000/- which shall be deposited by the Petitioners with the Consumer Legal Aid Account of NCDRC within four weeks. 

Parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 21.08.2019 on which date the State Commission may either proceed to hear the arguments on the application for condonation of delay or fix a convenient date as per its board.

It is made clear that one last opportunity is given to the Petitioners to argue on this application, failing which the State Commission is free to pass any appropriate order in terms of law.

The Revision Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

 
......................J
DEEPA SHARMA
PRESIDING MEMBER
......................
C. VISWANATH
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.