Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

A/18/151

SHIGAN GROUP, GREENRICK - Complainant(s)

Versus

MAHESH KUMAR SONI - Opp.Party(s)

SH.ANURAG MAHESHWARI

19 Jul 2019

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

                    

                                  FIRST APPEAL NO. 151 OF 2018

(Arising out of order dated 12.06.2018 passed in C.C.No.419/2017 by the District Forum No.2, Jabalpur)

 

SHIGAN GROUP, GREENRICK.                                                                                                 …          APPELLANT.

 

Versus

                 

MAHESH KUMAR SONI & ORS.                                                                                                  …         RESPONDENTS.

 

BEFORE:

 

                  HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHANTANU S. KEMKAR    :      PRESIDENT

                  HON’BLE DR.  MRS MONIKA MALIK                           :      MEMBER               

 

                                      O R D E R

19.07.2019

 

           Shri Kartikeya Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant.

             Ms. Mona Paliwal, learned counsel for the respondent no.1.

             None for the respondent no.2 & 3.

 

As per Shri Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar :        

                        Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 12.06.2018 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum No.2, Jabalpur (For short the ‘Forum’) in C.C.No.419/2017, whereby the Forum after proceeding ex-parte against the appellant/opposite party no.1 has passed the order directing the appellant to give new E-Auto rickshaw or to pay Rs.1,50,000/- price of E-Auto rickshaw with interest @ 10% p.a. with further direction to pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- for mental agony and Rs.5,000/- as costs to the respondent, the appellant has filed this appeal.

2.                     Learned counsel for appellant has pointed out from the order-sheets indicating therein that the Forum has wrongly held that the service of notice on appellant has been effected.  As a result, the appellant could not file reply and defend the case.  In the circumstances, he submits that the impugned order as also the order by which the Forum has proceeded ex-parte against the appellant be set-aside. On the other hand learned counsel for respondent no.1 supported the impugned order.  She submits that the Forum has rightly proceeded ex-parte against the appellant as such no case for interference is made out.

3.                     We have heard learned counsel for parties and have gone through the record. On going through the record it is clear that the envelope for service of notice sent to the appellant could not be served by the postal department on the appellant and it was returned back with an endorsement that the appellant is not found.  In this view of the matter the

-2-

Forum has committed error in proceeding ex-parte against the appellant treating the appellant to be served.  Having regard to the aforesaid it is clear that the appellant was deprived of filing of reply and defend the case.

4.                     Therefore, in our considered view the impugned order deserves to be and is hereby set-aside.

5.                     The appellant shall file reply within 30 days from the date of appearance before the Forum. Parties to appear before the Forum on 09.08.2019. The Forum shall thereafter proceed in the complaint in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.    

6.                     With the aforesaid directions the appeal stands allowed.

 

 

            (Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar)            (Dr. Monika Malik)              

                     President                                         Member