Delhi

StateCommission

RP/52/2018

ONE ASSIST CONSUMER SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

VIKAS AGGARWAL & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

SANJAY K. CHADHA

01 Jun 2018

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

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

 

 

Revision Petition No.52/2018

(Arising out of the order dated 12.10.2017 passed in Complaint Case No.410/2017 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum(West) Janak Puri, New Delhi)

 

 

One Assist Consumer Solution  Pvt. Ltd.                                       … Petitioner

 

Versus

 

Shri Vikas Aggarwal & Anr.                                                       … Respondents

 

 

BEFORE:

Justice Veena Birbal, President

Ms. Salma Noor, Member

 

 

For the Petitioner:	Mr. Avanish Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondents	None

 

 

Dated: 01^st June, 2018

 

ORDER

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President

 

                 By way of this revision petition prayer is made for recalling of the order dated 12.10.2017 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (West) in CC No.410/2017 by which the petitioner/OP has been proceeded ex-parte.

                 It is stated that on 07.10.2017, the petitioner received notice in the aforesaid complaint for appearance on 12.10.2016. The petitioner after receiving the notice immediately engaged an advocate for appearing on the date fixed. On query it was informed that the matter had been posted on 08.03.2018 for filing reply. The reply was prepared and was sent to the counsel. However, on 08.03.2018 the counsel informed that his colleague to whom the matter was entrusted did not appear on 12.10.2017 as he was unwell, as a result the Ld. District Forum proceeded an ex-parte on 12.10.2017 against the petitioner. It is stated that the said colleague did not reveal the true fact. It is stated that it was only on 08.03.2018, the counsel for petitioner came to know that the petitioner was proceeded ex-parte due to non-appearance. It is stated that due to mistake act on the part of petitioner’s counsel, the petitioner should not be made to suffer.

                 No one has appeared on behalf of the respondents despite being served. We are satisfied that the petitioner has not been able to appear on 12.10.2017 due to bonafide mistake. Petitioner has right to defend the case before the District Forum. However, some delay has been caused which can be compensated with costs.

                   In view of the said reasoning as well as keeping in mind the interest of justice as well as for effective disposal of the case on merits, we accept this petition, set aside the impugned order subject to payment of costs of Rs.4,000/- to the respondent No.1/complainant.

                 It is stated that the next date before the District Forum is 06.06.2018. On the said date the petitioner/OP shall pay costs of Rs.4,000/- to the respondent No.1/complainant and shall also file its written statement on the said date. Thereafter, the District Forum shall proceed further in the matter in accordance with law.

                 A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of costs as per rule and also to the concerned District Forum. Thereafter, the file be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

(Justice Veena Birbal)

President

 

 

 

(Salma Noor)

Member