Common Oral Order in Revision Petition No.149 of 2015 to Revision Petition No.159 of 2011 (Total 11 cases)

Per – Hon’ble Mr. Narendra Kawde, Member

          Adv. Ajay Keshav Pawar instructed by Adv. Anand V. Patwardhan is present on behalf of the Petitioner.  Adv. Smt. Poonam Makhijani is present on behalf of the Respondent No.1.  None present for the Respondent No.2.  Today, the Respondent No.2 has failed to appear before this Commission without any sufficient reason.  Adv. Hemant Prabhulkar instructed by Jurisperitus Mumbai is present on behalf of the Respondent No.3/CIDCO.  We have heard the parties present before us at length.  With the help of the parties, we have also carefully perused the material placed on record.

[2]     Counsel for the Petitioner contended that without service of notice to the Petitioner, merely on the basis of contentions raised by the Respondent No.3/CIDCO, the District Forum impleaded him as a necessary party in the array of the Opponents.  On behalf of the Petitioner it is stated that after the Petitioner came to be impleaded in the complaint proceedings, in the array of the Opponents, the Petitioner has filed his written version. 

[3]     Hence, all these revision petitions bearing Nos.149 of 2015 to 159 of 2011 are hereby allowed.  Clause (02) from the operative part of the common order dated 21/11/2014 passed by Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thane in Consumer Complaint No.179 of 2012 to Consumer Complaint No.188 of 2012 is set aside.  Parties shall appear before the District Forum on 13/08/2015 on which date, without seeking any further time, the Petitioner shall file his reply to the application praying that he may be impleaded as a the party Opponent.  Thereafter, the District Forum shall afresh decide the issue as to whether the Petitioner herein is a necessary party for proper adjudication of the complaints.  Costs shall be costs in the cause.

Pronounced and dictated on Tuesday, 04^th August, 2015