Delhi

StateCommission

RP/46/2016

maruti suzki - Complainant(s)

Versus

RINKU YADAV - Opp.Party(s)

19 Apr 2016

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

Date of Decision: 19.04.2016

 

 

Revision Petition No.46/2016

(Arising out of the order dated 14.12.2015 passed in Complaint Case No.557/2015 by the District Consumer Redressal Forum (South-West), New Delhi)

 

In the matter of:

 

Maruti Suzuki India Limited,

Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road,

Vasant Kunj, New Delhi -110070.

                                              ....Petitioner

 

 

Versus

 

1. Sh. Rinku Yadav,

S/o Sh. Ashok Kumar Yadav,

R/o G-1334, Sangam Vihar,

New Delhi.

 

2. General Manager,

Maruti Suzuki Workshop Bagga Link,

Plot No.4,6,8,10, Bawa Potteries Compound,

Aruna Asaf Road, Vasant Kunj,

Near Fortis Hospital Opposite Nirulas,

New Delhi -110017.

….….....Respondents

 

 

CORAM

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President.

Ms. Salma Noor, Member.

 

 

1.     Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?

 

2.      To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President

 

 

1. This is a revision petition wherein prayer is made for setting aside the order dated  14.12.2015 by which the petitioner herein i.e. OP No.1 before the District Forum has been proceeded ex-parte.
2. Counsel for the petitioner/OP No.1 has stated that the petitioner/OP No.1 was never served before the District Forum for 14.12.2015 i.e. the date on which the petitioner/OP No.1 was proceeded ex-parte. It is stated that on 22.02.2016, when Ms. Sonal Chauhan, counsel for the petitioner appeared before the District Forum in some other matter titled as Vidyut Rai v. Marketing Times Automobiles & Anr. bearing CC No.185/2013, on that date it was found that in the cause list the present complaint bearing CC No.557/2015 wherein the petitioner/OP No.1 had been proceeded ex-parte was also listed. On enquiry from the Court Master, it was revealed that the petitioner/OP No.1 has already been proceeded ex-parte on 14.12.2015. Thereafter, the aforesaid counsel informed the petitioner company and necessary steps were taken and present revision petition has been filed before this Commission.
3. It is stated that the petitioner/OP No.1 was never served before the District Forum, otherwise there was no reason why the petitioner/OP No.1 would not have appeared before the District Forum.
4. Respondent No.1/complainant submits that petitioner/OP No.1 was duly served before the District Forum. It is stated that a dasti notice was given to the respondent No.1/complainant and the same was sent to petitioner/OP No.1 by speed post. A copy of the track event is also placed on record, which shows that the notice was delivered to petitioner/OP No.1 on 26.10.2015. Ld. Counsel for petitioner/OP No.1 states that it was intentionally not delivered at the proper address of petitioner/OP No.1.
5. We have considered the submissions made. The case is at initial stage. As per petitioner/OP NO.1 it has good case on merits. For effective disposal of the case on merits and also considering that there is a dispute about the address where the petitioner/OP No.1 was required to be served, we set aside the impugned order qua the petitioner/OP No.1 subject to cost of Rs.3,000/-.
6. It is stated that no one had appeared on behalf of respondent No.2/OP before the District Forum despite service, and was proceeded ex-parte on that date. Accordingly, no notice is issued to respondent No.2/OP No.2.
7. It is further stated that next date before the District Forum is 25.04.2016. 
8. It is stated that the petitioner/OP No.1 has not received the copy of the complaint. Respondent No.1/complainant shall supply the copy of the complaint to the petitioner/OP No.1 within 07 days from today. Upon receipt of the copy of the complaint, the petitioner/OP No.1 shall file its written statement within 30 days of receipt and shall also pay the costs of Rs.3,000/- to the respondent No.1/complainant.
9. The parties are directed to appear before District Forum on 25.04.2016.
10. The petition stands allowed.
11. Copy of this order be given to the parties and be also sent to the Ld. District Forum(South-West) for information and keeping it on record for compliance

           File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

 

(Justice Veena Birbal)

•  

 

(Salma Noor)

Member