Haryana

StateCommission

RP/34/2024

NIRMAL SEEDS PVT. LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SUSHIL KUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

SUSHEEL GAUTAM

22 Jul 2024

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                         

                                                          Date of Institution:07.05.2024

                                                          Date of final hearing:22.07.2024

                                                          Date of Pronouncement: 22.07.2024

 

 

REVISION PETITION NO.34 OF 2024

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF

 

Nirmal Seeds Pvt. Ltd. 63, Dhadgaon, Laxmi Nagar, Pachora, Maharashtra-424201 through its Director/authorized signatory Mr. Hari Om Sharma S/o Jagdish Sharma, age 53 years, Service, Zonal Manager (Sales &  Marketing) at State of Haryana. Aadhar No.963068829087, Mobile No.98965-77663.

 

                                      ….Petitioner

Versus

 

 

 

1. Sushil Kumar S/o  ShriBaru Ram, resident of VPO Assan Kalan, Tehsil & District Panipat.

…Respondent

 

2. M/s Shiv Shankar Beej Bhandar, 101, New Shiv Chowk, Sanoli Road, Panipat through tis Prop./authorized signatory, Mobile No.9215177774.

 

                                                          …Performa Respondent

 

         

CORAM:   Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.P.S. Mann, President

                   MR. S.P. SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                   Ms. Manjula, Member                                                                                                                                         

 

Present:     Shri Susheel Gautam, counsel for the revisionist.

 

 

 

 

PER: T.P.S. MANN, J.

 

ORDER

 

 

1. Opposite party No.2-Nirmal Seeds Pvt. Ltd. had filed the present revision petition for challenging the order dated 21.02.2024 passed by the District Consumer Commission, Panipat whereby it was proceeded against ex parte.
2. The revision came up for preliminary hearing before the State Commission for 20.05.2024 and after hearing counsel for the revisionist, notice of the revision was issued to the respondents through registered post and in the meantime, the District Consumer Commission was directed not to pass the final order.
3. Counsel for the revisionist states that he had collected the copy of the order dated 20.05.2024 for his client. However, his client could not bring to the notice of the District Consumer Commission about the order passed by the State Commission on 20.05.2024 and accordingly, the proceedings in the complaint continued and vide order dated 18.06.2024, the complaint preferred by the complainant Sushil Kumar-respondent No.1 was dismissed rendering the revision as infructuous.
4. In view of the above, the revision is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.
5. Application(s) pending, if any, stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order.
6. A copy of this order be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the law. The order be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.
7. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this order.

 

 

                                                                             (T.P.S. MANN)

                                                                             PRESIDENT

 

 

                                                                             (S.P. SOOD)

JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

 

 

                                                                             (MANJULA)

                                                                             MEMBER 

Pronounced On: 22.07.2024

MS