STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

Date of Institution: 22.11.2024

                                                         Date of final hearing: 17.12.2024

Date of pronouncement: 17.12.2024

Revision Petition No.94 of 2024

Amstrad Consumer India Pvt. Ltd., Solitare, Business Hub G-Core, Unit No. G-3070, 3^rd Floor, Viman Nagar, Pune, Maharashtra-411014, through authorized signatory-Sh. Raj Kumar Sharma.

                                   .….Revisionist-respondent No.1

Versus

1. Ajay Kumar S/o Sh. Prem Chand, R/o Village Nangawan, Naugawan, Tehsil Naraingarh, District Ambala.

….Respondent/complainant

2. M.R. Saini Enterprises, 1, Ward No. 6, Near Lotton Chungi, Naraingarh, District Ambala.      

….Performa Respondent/Respondent No. 2

CORAM:             Sh. Naresh Katyal, Judicial Member.

                             Sh. S.C. Kaushik, Member. 

Present:-              Mr. Bharat Bhushan Sehgal, counsel for revisionist.

O R D E R

PER: NARESH KATYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

                    In this revision petition; revisionist (OP No. 1 in complaint) has invited challenge against order dated 07.08.2024 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-Ambala vide which revisionist/OP No.1 has been proceeded against ex-parte. Main complaint is still pending before learned District Consumer Commission-Ambala. Keeping in view the text of revision petition; this Commission does not deem it necessary to issue notice of it to complainant as it would unnecessary delay the disposal of main complaint, rather it would save parties to this lis from the burden of unnecessary expenses.

2.       Learned counsel for revisionist/OP No.1 has urged that non-appearance of revisionist/OP No.1 before learned District Consumer Commission-Ambala on 07.08.2024 was neither intentional nor it was accentuated by any mala-fide and revisionist/OP No.1 has not gained anything through its absence. It is urged that now permission be granted to revisionist herein to appear before learned District Consumer Commission and to tender defense/written version by setting aside order dated 07.08.2024. Further, it is contended that main complaint is still sub-judice.

3.       On analyzing above contentions and while keeping in view the contention of learned counsel for revisionist/OP No.1 that main complaint is still sub-judice, therefore, this Commission is of firm opinion that no prejudice would be caused to complainant (Ajay Kumar) in case revisionist/OP No.1 is now allowed to join proceedings of complaint case and also permitted to tender its defense/written statement. While observing so, this Commission is conscious of well settled legal adage that all procedural laws are meant to sub-serve the cause of justice and not to defeat the same. Further, in process of justice dispensation, every litigant must be afforded adequate opportunity to put forward his/her/its case in a meaningful manner.  In case titled as Rajeev Hitendra Pathak & Ors. Vs. Achyut Kashinath Karekar & Another, Civil Appeal No. 4307 of 2007 AND case titled as M.O.H. Lathers Vs. United Commercial Bank Civil Appeal No.8155 of 2001 both decided on 19.08.2011 reported in 2011 (4) PLR 274; Hon’ble Apex Court has held that: “State Commission or District Consumer Forum do not have power to set aside their own ex-parte order nor they have power to review their own orders. This power vests in National Commission only by Section 22 (A) of the Act.” It would legally imply that ex-parte order passed by learned District Consumer Commission can be legally assailed by filing revision petition.

4.       In view of above, this revision petition is allowed and impugned order dated 07.08.2024 passed by learned District Consumer Commission-Ambala in Complaint Case No.155 of 2024 titled as Ajay Kumar Vs. Amstrad Consumer India Pvt. Ltd. & Another is hereby set aside. Revisionist herein (OP No.1/Amstrad Consumer India Pvt. Ltd. in Complaint Case No. 155 of 2024) would now appear before learned District Consumer Commission-Ambala on 18.12.2024, either through its authorized representative or through counsel and learned District Consumer Commission would thereafter provide one effective opportunity to revisionist to enable it to file its written version/written statement. This concession granted to revisionist herein/OP No.1 would however, be subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited by revisionist-OP No.1 in District Legal Services Authority-Ambala and receipt in this regard would be produced in record of Complaint Case (C.C. No.155 of 2024) pending before learned District Consumer Commission-Ambala. Deposit of cost amount of Rs.10,000/- would be the condition precedent for appearing and for filing written statement by revisionist.

5.      A copy of this order be provided to parties of this lis, free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. This order be also uploaded forthwith on website of this Commission for perusal of parties.

6.       File be consigned to record room.                                               

Date of pronouncement: 17^th December, 2024.

                                            S.C. Kaushik               Naresh Katyal         

                                           Member                        Judicial Member

                                           Addl. Bench                Addl. Bench