Delhi

StateCommission

A/556/2016

ASHWANI GAUR - Complainant(s)

Versus

TAXI FOR SURE PVT. LTD. & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

RAKESH PATIYAL

10 Jul 2017

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

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

 

Date of Decision:10.07.2017

 

First Appeal- 556/2016

(Arising out of the order dated 07.10.2016 passed in Complainant Case No. 329/2015 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (II), Udyog Sadan, New Delhi)

 

Ashwani Gaur,

S/o Shri Braham Dev Gaur,

H.No.314, Vill-Singhola, P.O. Narela,

Delhi-110040.

…..Appellant

Versus

1. Taxi for Sure Pvt. Ltd.,

At: Khasra No. 337, Ground Floor,

Sultanpur Village, Near Sultanpur Metro Station,

Delhi-110032.

 

(Through its Managing Director)

 

Also at:

 

D-8, B-1,

Near Mohan Estate Metro Station,

Mathura Road, Sarita Vihar-110044.

 

(Through its Managing Director)

 

2. OLA Cabs Pvt. Ltd.,

Plot No. 890, Office No. 202,

2^nd Floor, Udyog Vihar, Near Shiv Mandir,

Gurgaon-122016.

 

(Through its Managing Director)

.….Respondents

 

 

CORAM

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President

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. Present appeal is filed for setting aside of order dated 7.10.16 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum(II), Udyog Sadan, New Delhi (in short, the “District Forum”) whereby the complaint filed by appellant/complainant has been dismissed for non-appearance. 
2. The aforesaid order reads as under:

            “Sh. Akshay Goel, Adv. for the OP has appeared in the morning.

 

            Several calls have been given since morning at different intervals.  It is now 2:40 (two forty) p.m.  None was also present on behalf of the Complainant on the previous date i.e. 17.08.16.  Therefore, we dismiss the complaint in default for non-prosecution.  Let a copy of this order be given dasti to Counsel for OP and copy be also sent to the Complainant through Speed Post.  File be consigned to record room.”

 

3. Ld. Counsel for the appellant/complainant has submitted that the complaint filed by the appellant/complainant was being conducted by Shri S.D. Sharma, Advocate before District Forum.  It is stated that on the date fixed i.e. 7.10.16, the appellant/complainant was not in Delhi as he had gone to Pune to attend his college.  It is stated that on the said date, Shri S.D. Sharma, Counsel also could not appear and due to non-appearance, the complaint was dismissed for non-appearance.  It is stated that even prior to the aforesaid date i.e. 17.8.16, the Counsel for the appellant/complainant could not appear as he was out of station.  It is stated that the appellant/complainant is a law student of Bharati Vidyapeeth University, Pune and in connection with classes and examination, he was in Pune on 17.8.16 and 7.10.16 respectively.  It is further submitted that the respondent/OP had filed a revision petition before this Commission which was listed for hearing on 22.11.16.  The appellant/complainant had appeared before State Commission in the aforesaid petition.  However, the respondent/OP did not appear and on that date, due to non-appearance of respondent/OP, some doubt arose in the mind of appellant/complainant and he went to District Forum to know about the status of the complaint case where he came to know that none had appeared on his behalf on 17.8.16 and 7.10.16, therefore, the District Forum had dismissed the complaint for non-appearance.  It is stated that the appellant/complainant immediately procured certified copy of the order dated 7.10.16 and appeal was filed before this Commission. 
4. Ld. Counsel for the respondents/OPs has submitted that no justified reasons have been given by the appellant/complainant for non-appearance.  It is stated that appellant/complainant was not serious in pursuing the complaint.  It is alleged that appellant/complainant be put to prove the truthfulness of the reasons mentioned in the appeal for non-appearance.  It is stated that the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
5. We find no reason to disbelieve the averments made in this appeal for non-appearance on 7.10.16 which are supported with the affidavit of appellant/complainant.  The appellant has been able to show sufficient cause for non-appearance on 7.10.16.  No material is placed on record by respondents/OPs to show that the stand taken by appellant/complainant is not correct.  There is nothing to show that non-appearance on the part of appellant/complainant was deliberate. Accordingly, we allow this appeal and set aside the impugned order and restore the complaint to its original number.
6. Let the parties appear before the District Forum on 25.8.17.         
7. A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum.  Thereafter the file be consigned to record room.

 

 

(Justice Veena Birbal)​

President

 

 

(Salma Noor)

Member