(Delivered on 22 /10/2021)
PER SHRI A. Z. KHWAJA, HON’BLE PRESIDING MEMBER.
1. Petitioner /complainant – Mr. Anilkumar Ramnarayan Tiwari has preferred the present revision petition feeling aggrieved by the order dated 24/10/2018 passed by the learned Additional District Consumer Commission , Nagpur in Consumer Complaint No. RBT/CC/11/270 whereby the application filed by the petitioner/complainant for carrying out amendment in the complaint came to be dismissed.
2. Short facts arising out of the revision petition are that, the present petitioner /complainant had availed loan facility from the respondent/ O.P.–Diwan Housing Finance Ltd. of Rs. 3,00,000/- for purchasing a flat which was sanctioned on 03/01/2003. Petitioner /complainant has contended that he had regularly paid monthly installments but the respondent /O.P. had charged excessive interest from time to time and thereby had committed deficiency in service and so the consumer complaint came to be filed by the present petitioner.
3. It appears that after the close of evidence by the parties the present petitioner/complainant moved an application for carrying out amendment in the complaint on the ground that during the pendency of the complaint certain subsequent developments had taken place namely the respondent /O.P. has taken possession the flat of the complainant and after calling out public auction sold the flat and no Sale Certificate was obtained. Petitioner/complainant has also contended that the excessive interest was charged from time to time and loan statement was also not supplied. All these facts needed to be incorporate in the complaint being subsequent events but learned Additional District Consumer Commission, Nagpur dismissed the application for amendment by passing an order on 24/10/2018 on the ground that the petitioner /complainant had sufficient knowledge of the events and the amendment application was filed merely to prolong the matter as the case was already posted for oral argument. Against this impugned order dated 24/10/2018 passed by the Additional District Consumer Commission, Nagpur, the petitioner /complainant has come up in revision petition.
4. I have heard Mrs. S.K. Pounikar, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Deshpande , learned advocate for the respondent – Diwan Housing Finance Ltd. It is vehemently submitted by Mrs. S.K. Pounikar, learned advocate for the petitioner that though the amendments were relating to subsequent events and were necessary to be brought on record these facts was not taken in to consideration at all by the learned Additional District Consumer Commission, Nagpur and the application for amendment was rejected solely on the ground that the same was filed after huge delay and also when the matter was posted for oral argument. Mrs. S.K. Pounikar, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the proposed amendment was very much material and necessary for adjudication of the complaint on merits. It is pointed out by Mrs. S.K. Pounikar, learned advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner had demanded the loan account statement so that all the installments of loan to be repaid by the petitioner/complainant but the loan statement came to be supplied only on 02/05/2019 and not earlier as referred in the order passed by the Additional District Consumer Commission, Nagpur. Secondly, Mrs. S.K. Pounikar, learned advocate for the petitioner has contended that the proposed amendment was in no way going to change the nature of the complaint.
5. I have carefully gone through the application for amendment moved by the complainant, copy of which is placed on record as well as impugned order dated 24/10/2018. In the amendment application the complainant has referred to the fact that the O.P. had taken possession of the flat and thereafter sold the flat by way of public auction and no details of auction were provided which amounted to deficiency in service. The learned advocate for the petitioner /complainant has also contended that the respondent / O.P. had charged rate of interest in violation of rules and circular of the Reserve Bank of India. No doubt, the record shows that the amendment application came to be moved at the stage when the matter was fixed for oral argument and so there was huge delay in moving the application. The learned Additional District Consumer Commission, Nagpur has observed that the petitioner /complainant has taken several adjournments and matter was getting delayed but I am of the view that solely on this count of inordinate delay the amendment application could not have been dismissed more particularly when the amendment was relating to subsequent events which were having a bearing on the complaint. In my view , the proposed amendments were quite necessary for adjudication of the consumer dispute and were not going to change the nature of the dispute. So far as the aspects of delay was concerned the respondent can be compensated by saddling suitable costs upon the petitioner /complainant. As such I feel that the order passed by the learned Additional District Consumer Commission, Nagpur dated 24/10/2018 will have to be set aside and the amendment application will have to be allowed after imposing suitable cost. I therefore, proceed to pass the following order.
ORDER
i. Revision Petition No. RP/19/12 is hereby allowed.
ii. Order dated 24/10/2018 passed by the learned Additional District Consumer Commission; Nagpur on amendment application is hereby set aside.
iii. Amendment application moved by the complainant /petitioner is hereby allowed subject to cost of Rs. 2500/- to be paid to the respondent within a period three weeks.
iv. Liberty is granted to the respondent to make consequential amendment, if necessary.
v.. Copy of order be furnished to both the parties free of cost.