View 585 Cases Against Railways
View 585 Cases Against Railways
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS filed a consumer case on 24 Sep 2018 against V. VIJAY KUMAR in the StateCommission Consumer Court. The case no is A/487/2017 and the judgment uploaded on 29 Sep 2018.
IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI
(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)
Date of Decision:24.09.2018
First Appeal No. 487/2017
(Arising out of the order dated 03.04.2014passed in complaint case No. 639/2013 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-VI, M-Block, VikasBhawan, New Delhi-110001)
In the matter of:
Ministry of Railways,
Through Divisional Commercial Manger (Claim),
D.R.M. Office,
New Delhi ….......Appellant
Versus
V. Vijay Kumar,
M-67A, Mausam Complex,
Lodhi Colony,
New Delhi. ........Respondent
CORAM
JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL - PRESIDENT
SALMA NOOR - MEMBER
1. Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment? Yes
2. To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes
SALMA NOOR - MEMBER
“That it is respectfully submitted that no notice was ever served on the OP/appellant herein. Address given in the Memo of Parties is also incorrect. The copy of Cross Appeal was unofficially handed over to Inspector (Legal) in the Court on 17.08.2015. It took some time to verify it from record. No notice or complaint No.639/13 was ever served. Thereafter the certified copy of the entire record was applied for by our counsel and we came to know that the original record has been transferred from Delhi Forum to State Commission which took time in searching of record. Thereafter certified copies of entire record were applied and steps were taken to file the present appeal. It is respectfully submitted that it took some time and further to take permission from higher authorities and to file the present appeal.
That there is no intentional delay and sincere efforts were made to file the appeal as early as possible. Time was taken in obtaining the certified copy of entire record and to file the appeal may be condoned in the interest of justice.”
“To verify the contention of the respondent/OP, we have requisitioned the District Forum record. Order of the Ld. District Forum vide which the respondent/OP proceeded ex-parte reads as under:
Pr. Complainant.
None for OP.
Notice issued to OP and proof of service is on record. Case called out several times till 3 P.M. None appeared on behalf of OP.
OP is proceeded ex-parte.
Fix 25.2.14 for ex-parte evidence by compl.”
We have gone through the District Forum record. It is evident from the record that notice upon respondent/OP was duly served. Acknowledgement card of registered envelop is also annexed in the District Forum record which shows that the notice was served upon respondent/OP on 02.12.2013 and wherein the next date is also mentioned as 18.12.2013. Hence, the contention of the respondent/OP that it was not served before the Ld. District Forum is without any substance. Further, the respondent/OP has not filed any appeal before this commission challenging the impugned order. The respondent/OP was given opportunity to contest the case before the Ld. District Forum and it is respondent/OP who has not availed the opportunity for the reasons best known to it.”
File be consigned to record room.
(Justice VeenaBirbal)
President
(Salma Noor)
Member
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.