Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

FA/12/1735

IDEA CELLULAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

DEVKUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

08 Jun 2022

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

 

                                  FIRST APPEAL NO. 1735 OF 2012

(Arising out of order dated 19.01.2012 passed in C.C.No.97/2011 by the District Commission, Rewa)

 

MANAGER, IDEA CELLULAR LTD.                                                               …          APPELLANT.

 

Versus

                 

DEV KUMAR.                                                                                                   …         RESPONDENT.                                     

                                    

BEFORE:

 

                  HON’BLE DR. (MRS) MONIKA MALIK    :      PRESIDING MEMBER

                  HON’BLE DR. SRIKANT PANDEY          :      MEMBER

                 HON’BLE SHRI D. K. SHRIVASTAVA    :       MEMBER 

 

                                      O R D E R

 

08.06.2022

 

           Shri Amit Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant.

            None for the respondent.

 

As Dr. (Mrs) Monika Malik :   

    

                       This appeal filed by the opposite party/appellant is directed against the order dated 19.01.2012 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rewa (For short ‘District Commission’) in C.C.No.97/2011 whereby the District Commission has partly allowed the complaint filed by the complainant and directed the opposite party to refund Rs.2,000/- towards cost of the defective net connector with interest @ 7% p.a. from 11.08.2010, till realization. In addition compensation of Rs.10,000/- with another sum of Rs.2,000/- as costs has also been awarded.  

 

-2-

2.                The complainant had filed complaint alleging deficiency in service on part of the opposite party, seeking refund of the cost of defective net connector, along with compensation and costs.

3.                Heard.

4.                Learned counsel for the opposite party/appellant argued that service of notice on opposite party at the address as mentioned in the consumer complaint was not proper, as the opposite party has no such address.  He argued that the correct address of the opposite party is Idea Cellular Limited, Customer Care Circle, 139-140, Electronic Complex, Pardesipura, Indore (M.P.) as against what has been mentioned in the complaint. Notice which is held to be served via registered post was as a matter of fact not served and therefore, the District Commission has wrongly proceeded ex-parte against the opposite party/appellant.  He argued that due to the aforesaid, the impugned order allowing the complaint deserves to be set-aside.

5.                In this view of the matter, we deem it appropriate that the matter be remanded back to the District Commission.  Accordingly, the impugned order is set-aside and the case is remanded back to the District Commission for deciding it afresh on merits, in accordance with law.

6.                Parties are directed to appear before the District Commission on 04.07.2022.

-3-

7.                Record of the case be sent at the earliest to the District Commission.

8.                The complainant/respondent is directed to supply copy of the complaint, along with accompanied documents to the counsel appearing for opposite party /appellant on the date of appearance before the District Commission. The opposite party/appellant shall file reply within 30 days, subsequently.

9.                The District Commission is directed to proceed further in the matter in accordance with law and decide the case as expeditiously as possible.

10.              With the aforesaid observations, this appeal stands disposed of with no order as to costs.

 

     (Dr. Monika Malik)   (Dr.Srikant Pandey)   (D. K. Shrivastava)         

     Presiding Member           Member                     Member