.(Delivered on 02/09/2021)
PER SHRI A. Z. KHWAJA, HON’BLE PRESIDING MEMBER.
1. Petitioner –Trimurti Developers has filed the present revision petition feeling aggrieved by the order dated 06/07/2019 passed by the learned District Consumer Forum, Nagpur in Consumer Complaint No. CC/235/2019 whereby the learned District Consumer Forum, Nagpur proceeded exparte against the petitioner.
2. Brief facts leading to filing of the revision petition the present revision petition are that the respondent – Sau. Geeta Dadarao Handekar had filed the Consumer Complaint against the present revision petitioner alleging deficiency in service and also seeking to execute the sale deed in her favour. After filing of the Consumer Complaint notices came to be issued and were returnable on 06/07/2019. Petitioner has contended that notices were not at all served and he was not aware of the order passed by the learned District Consumer Forum, Nagpur, proceeding exparte against the present petitioner. The petitioner has contended that the learned District Consumer Forum, Nagpur had not appreciated the facts and law in proper perspective. Petitioner came to know about the said order dated 06/07/2019 through Web Site and then also filed an application on 05/10/2019 for setting aside the exparte order but no order was passed on the same. Petitioner has also contended that the address mentioned in the complaint were also incorrect. According to the petitioner irreparable loss will be caused in case the impugned order dated 06/07/2019 is not set aside and petitioner is not allowed to take part in the proceedings.
3. I have heard Mr. Chaitanya Kulkarni, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Bhandakkar, learned advocate for the respondent. Mr. Chaitanya Kulkarni, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the learned District Consumer Forum, Nagpur had act in haste and had passed the order on 06/07/2019 which was in fact the returnable date. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner , the petitioner had no knowledge regarding the same. Learned advocate for the respondent has strongly opposed this contention and has submitted that there was no error in the address supplied in the complaint. Learned advocate for the petitioner has also submitted that if a party to the proceedings has been proceeded exparte he can always join the proceedings from the next date. On this aspect he has relied on one judgment in the case of Prashant Govindrao Ramteke Vs. Siddharth Hiraman Ratnaparkhi and Anr. delivered by the Hon’ble National Commission on 26/11/2013 in Revision Petition No. 2956 of 2013. I have gone through this judgment . Petitioner has taken a plea that the address given in the complaint was not correct and due to incorrect address the petitioner did not get knowledge about the notice issued by the respondent. Petitioner has also placed on record one copy of the application filed before the learned District Consumer Forum, Nagpur for permission to set aside the exparte order and same is date 05/10/2019. It shows that the petitioner did not take any steps till 05/10/2019 though the order was passed on 06/07/2019. In any case I am of the view that the petitioner deserves to be granted an opportunity to take part in the proceedings so that the consumer complaint can be decided on merits. In this view of the matter I am of the opinion that looking to the grounds made in the revision petition the order dated 06/07/2019 needs to be set aside after imposing suitable cost and petitioner can be permitted to take part in the proceedings. As such I proceed to pass the following order.
ORDER
i. Revision petition No. RP/19/57 is hereby allowed
ii. Order dated 06/07/2019 passed by the learned District Consumer Forum, Nagpur is hereby set aside provided the petitioner pays cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the respondent within one week.
iii. After payment of cost petitioner is permitted to take part in the proceedings by filing written statement on record.
iv. Copy of order be furnished to both the parties free of cost.
