STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
U.T.,CHANDIGARH
Revision Petition No. | : | 09 of 2014 |
Date of Institution | : | 03.03.2014 |
Date of Decision | : | 14.03.2014 |
BCL Homes Ltd., through its Managing Director, Tejinder Kumar Bansal, resident of House No.253, Sector 7, Panchkula, Haryana.
…… Revision-Petitioner/ Opposite Party
V E R S U S
Din Dayal Singh Bedi, son of Sh. Mohan Singh Bedi, resident of House No.1352, Sector 34-C, Chandigarh.
....Respondent/complainant
BEFORE: JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER (RETD.), PRESIDENT.
Argued by:
PER JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER (RETD.), PRESIDENT
2. The facts of the Consumer Complaint, bearing No.757 of 2013, are that, the complainant, in the month of March, 2012, after going through the advertisements, got published by the Opposite Party, in various newspapers, with regard to the sale/booking of three bed room apartments each, having an area of 2170 square feet,in its project, under the name and style of “BCL Homes Limited”,approached it (Opposite Party), to buy one unit. The complainant was allured by the assurances of the representative of the Opposite Party, that the possession of the said apartment, would be delivered to him,the moment he completed all the required formalities. The total sale consideration of the said apartment was to the tune of Rs.18 lacs. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.6 lacs, was paid by the complainant, as booking amount, towards the said apartment, and the balance amount of Rs.12 lacs, was required to be paid, at the time of delivery of possession thereof. It was stated that, it was assured by the Opposite Party, that, in case, it failed to deliver the possession of apartment, in question, the booking amount would be refunded, alongwith interest.
3. It was further stated that
4.
5. Counsel for the Opposite Party, on the ground, that since it (District Forum), was not vested with the power to review/recall its own order, the complaint case could not be adjourned, for the purpose. As such, the complaint case was adjourned to 04.03.2014, for exparte arguments of the complainant.
6.
7.
8. rejected the same (request), on the ground, that since it (District Forum), was not vested with the power to review/recall its own order, the complaint case could not be adjourned, for the purpose.e.
9. On the other hand, the Counsel for the respondent/complainant, submitted thatthe absence of the Revision-Petitioner/Opposite Party, on 28.01.2014, despite service, in the District Forum, was intentional and deliberate.
10. t.However, on 24.02.2014, Sh. G.S. Sullar, Advocate, put in appearance on behalf of the Opposite Party, in the District Forum, and made a request for date, for filing an application for setting aside the exparte proceedings order dated 28.01.2014, yet, it
11.
12. it is settled principle of law, that every lis should normally be decided, on merits, than by resorting to hyper- technicalities. When hyper-technicalities, and the substantial justice, are pitted against each other, then the latter shall prevail over the former. The procedure, is, in the ultimate, the handmaid of justice, meant to advance the cause thereof, than to thwart the same.
13. In our considered opinion, an opportunity should be afforded to the Opposite Party, for filing vakalatnama, written version, and evidence, by way of affidavit(s), so that the complaint could be decided, on merits, and the rights of the Parties, are finally determined, by one Forum, one way or the other. In this view of the matter, the order impugned is liable to be set aside.
14.
15. According to Section 13 (3A) of the Act, every complaint is required to be decided, within three months, from the date of service of the Opposite Party, except the one, in which the goods are required to be sent to the Laboratory for examination. In that event, the complaint is required to be decided, within a period of 5 months, from the date of service of the Opposite Party(s).
16.
17.
18. The District Forum record, alongwith a certified copy of the order, be sent back, to it, immediately, so as to reach there, well before the date and time fixed i.e.
19. .
20.
Pronounced
March 14, 2014
Sd/-
[JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER (RETD.)]
PRESIDENT
Sd/-
(DEV RAJ)
MEMBER
Sd/-
(PADMA PANDEY)
Rg
