Delhi

StateCommission

FA/1083/2013

PNB - Complainant(s)

Versus

VIRENDER KR. JAIN - Opp.Party(s)

04 Aug 2014

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION DELHI
Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
 
First Appeal No. FA/1083/2013
(Arisen out of Order Dated in Case No. of District State Commission)
 
1. PNB
DILSHAD GARDEN, DELHI.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. VIRENDER KR. JAIN
R/O FLAT No.16/SI, BLOCK-B, DILSHAD GARDEN, DELHI-95.
...........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: 04.08.2014

                                    

First Appeal – 1083/2013

 

Punjab National Bank,

Dilshad Garden,

Delhi

Through its Manager

 

………Appellant

Vs

Virender Kumar Jain,

R/o Flat No. 16/SI,

Block-B, Dilshad Garden,

Delhi-95.

 ……..Respondent

 

 

CORAM

 

Salma Noor, Presiding Member

NP Kaushik, Member(Judicial)

 

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

2.   To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

 

SALMA NOOR, PRESIDING MEMBER

 

1.     In a complaint case bearing No.230/2013 Virender Kumar Jain vs Canara Bank & Ors. filed before District Forum (North-East), Nand Nagri, Delhi 06.09.2013 was fixed for appearance of the OP No.2/Appellant, but due to non-appearance, the Forum proceeded ex-parte.

2.      That is what brings the Appellant/OP in appeal before this Commission.

3.     We have heard Ms Marina K. Saikia, Counsel for the Appellant at the admission stage as there is no need to hear the Respondent.

4.      The version of the Appellant/OP No.2 for his non-appearance on the date fixed is that the Counsel of OP No.2 was stuck in the Karkardooma Courts and failed to appear before the District Forum and the case was proceeded ex-parte. In support of his contention, Appellant has filed an affidavit. There is no plausible reason not to rely and not to act upon this version of the appellant. Besides that it has never been the policy of law to stifle a contest and wherever possible, under the circumstances a lenient view in this regard has been recommended, so that the parties may have an opportunity to present their case before the Forum, so that the matter may be decided on merit. We therefore, allow the appeal setting aside the ex-parte orders dated 06.09.2013 in question and remand the case back to District Forum(North-East), Nand Nagri, Delhi with a direction to restore the complaint on its original number, and to further proceed in the case according to law. The Appellant/OP is directed to appear before the District Forum(North-East), Nand Nagri, Delhi on the date fixed.

5.   A copy of this order be sent to District Forum(North-East), Nand Nagri, Delhi to keep it on complaint file and for compliance.

 

 

                                    

                 

 

 
 
[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.