State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Tara Singh vs M.R.G. Finance Limited on 31 March, 2014
FIRST ADDITIONAL BENCH
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
PUNJAB
SECTOR 37-A, DAKSHIN MARG, CHANDIGARH.
First Appeal No.174 of 2012.
Date of Institution: 14.02.2012.
Date of Decision: 31.03.2014.
Tara Singh S/o Sh. Chanan Singh, R/o Village Kukkar Pind, Tehsil and
District Jalandhar.
.....Appellant/Complainant.
Versus
1. M.R.G. Finance Limited, Office No.249, Harnam Dass Pura,
Kapurthala Road, Jalandhar, through its Managing Director.
2. Mohinder Singh S/o Sh. Ujjagar Singh, R/o Village & Post Office
Mand, Tehsil and District Jalandhar, Managing Director/Director
Pooja Hire Purchase Ltd. Office No.249, Harnam Dass Pura,
Kapurthala Road, Jalandhar.
3. Satish Chander Gupta S/o Not Known, R/o 317, Master Tara
Singh Nagar, Jalandhar, Director Pooja Hire Purchase limited,
Office No.249, Harnam Dass Pura, Kapurthala
Road, Jalalandhar.
4. Satish Kumar Joshi S/o Sh. Sohan Lal, R/o Village Mithapur,
Tehsil and District Jalandhar, Director, Pooja Hire Purchase
Limited, Office No.249, Harnam Dass Pura, Kapurthala Road,
Jalandhar.
5. Simar Kaur W/o Sh. Rattan Singh, R/o Village Hirapur, Tehsil and
District Jalandhar, Director, Pooja Hire Purchase Limited, Office
No.249, Harnam Dass Pura, Kapurthala Road, Jalandhar.
6. Kuldeep Singh S/o Sh. Rattan Singh, R/o Village Hirapur, Tehsil
and District Jalandhar, Director, Pooja Hire Purchase Limited,
Office No.249, Harnam Dass Pura, Kapurthala Road,
Jalandhar.
...Respondents/OPs.
First Appeal against the order dated
09.01.2012 passed by the District
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
Jalandhar.
First Appeal No.174 of 2012 2
Before:-
Shri Inderjit Kaushik, Presiding Judicial Member.
Shri Jasbir Singh Gill, Member.
...................................
Present:- Ms. Amandeep Soni, Advocate, counsel for the appellant.
Respondents Exparte.
---------------------------------------- INDERJIT KAUSHIK, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This order will dispose of the two (2) appeals i.e. F.A. No.174 of 2012 (Tara Singh Vs M.R.G. Finance Ltd. & Ors.) and F.A. No.175 of 2012 (Tara Singh Vs Pooja Hire Purchase & Ors.) as the questions of law and facts involved in both the appeals are the same and both the appeal are directed against the similar orders dated 09.01.2012 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jalandhar (in short "the District Forum"). Facts are taken from F.A. No.174 of 2012 and the parties would be referred by their status in this appeal.
2. Sh. Tara Singh, appellant (In short "the appellant") has filed this appeal against the order dated 09.01.2012 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jalandhar (in short "the District Forum").
3. Facts in brief are that the appellant filed an application for restoration of the complaint which was dismissed on default on 17.02.2011, on the grounds that on 17.02.2011, the counsel for the appellant, namely Sh. Gurvinder Arora, Advocate was busy in Sessions trial U/s 307 IPC etc. in the court of Sh. B.S. Sandhu, Addl. Sessions judge, Jalandhar titled as "State Vs Harpreet Singh etc." and, as such, First Appeal No.174 of 2012 3 he could not appear at the time when the case was called by the District Forum. The counsel for the appellant appeared before the District Forum at about 1.30 p.m., but by that time, the case was already dismissed in default. The appellant was suffering from brain tumor and is not keeping good health and, thus, he could not come present personally on 17.02.2011.
4. The absence of the appellant or his counsel on 17.02.2011 was neither willful or intentional, but was due to above said reasons. It was prayed that the complaint may be restored to its original number in the interest of justice.
5. The District Forum, vide the impugned order under appeal dated 09.01.2012, dismissed the application, observing that the District Forum has no jurisdiction to review or recall its own order.
6. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 09.01.2012, the appellant has come up in appeal.
7. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, perused the record of the learned District Forum and have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant.
8. The respondents have not contested the appeal and were proceeded against exparte.
9. The reason for non-appearance of the counsel for the appellant given is that the counsel was busy in Sessions trial U/s 307 IPC etc. in the court of Sh. B.S. Sandhu, Addl. Sessions judge, Jalandhar titled as "State Vs Harpreet Singh etc." The appellant himself could also not appear because he is suffering from brain tumor and is not keeping good health.
First Appeal No.174 of 2012 4
10. Without commenting anything on the merits of the impugned order under appeal, we are of the view that the larger interest of justice requires that the dispute between the parties should be decided on merits. The appellant is also stated to have been suffering from brain tumor and is not keeping good health. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the complainant should be given a chance for decision on merits. The respondents can always be compensated with costs.
11. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant is accepted and the impugned order under appeal dated 09.01.2012 as well as order dated 17.02.2011 passed by the District Forum are set aside. The complaint is ordered to be restored against its original number. The appellant is burdened with Rs.1,000/- as costs. The cost shall be paid before the District Forum, by the appellant to the respondents in equal shares.
F.A. No.175 of 2012:-
12. In view of the reasons and discussion held in F.A. No.174 of 2012 (Tara Singh Vs M.R.G. Finance Ltd. & Ors.), the F.A. No.175 of 2012 (Tara Singh Vs Pooja Hire Purchase & Ors.) is accepted and the impugned order under appeal dated 09.01.2012 as well as order dated 17.02.2011 passed by the District Forum are set aside. The complaint is ordered to be restored against its original number. The appellant is burdened with Rs.1,000/- as costs. The cost shall be paid before the District Forum, by the appellant to the respondents in equal shares.
13. The appellant through counsel in both the cases is directed to appear before the District Forum, Jalandhar on 30.04.2014. First Appeal No.174 of 2012 5
14. The District Forum shall give sufficient opportunity to both the parties and decide the complaints on merits.
15. Record of the District Forum of both cases alongwith copies of the order be sent to the District Forum forthwith.
16. The arguments in both these appeals were heard on 31.03.2014 and the orders were reserved. Now the orders be communicated to the parties.
17. The appeals could not be decided within the stipulated timeframe due to heavy pendency of court cases.
18. Copy of the order be placed in F.A. No.175 of 2012 (Tara Singh Vs. Pooja Hire Purchase Ltd. & Ors.).
(Inderjit Kaushik) Presiding Judicial Member (Jasbir Singh Gill) Member March 31, 2014.
(Gurmeet S)