State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Wg Cdr (Retd) Walter Henry Marshall vs M S E D C L on 13 September, 2010
Daily Order
BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
First Appeal No. A/10/543
(Arisen out of order dated 17/03/2010 in Case No. 89/2008 of District Pune)
1. WG CDR (RETD) WALTER HENRY MARSHALL
5 CASTELLINO ROAD PUNE
Maharastra
....Appellant
Versus
1. M S E D C L
RASTA PETH DIVISION M S E D C L RASTA PETH PUNE 411011
Maharastra
....Respondent
BEFORE :
Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar , PRESIDING MEMBER Hon'ble Mrs. S.P.Lale , Member PRESENT:
D G SANT , Advocate for the Appellant 1 S.Hussain, Advocate for the Respondent 1 *JUDGEMENT/ORDER Per Shri P.N.Kashalkar, Hon'ble Presiding Judicial Member:
This appeal is filed by org.complainant whose consumer complaint no.89/2008 is pending on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune was disposed of for non-prosecution on 17/03/2010.
We heard Adv.Mr.D.G.Sant for appellant and Adv.Mr.S.Hussain for respondent. Adv.Mr.Hussain undertakes to file vakalatnama for respondent.
The only order under challenge in this appeal is disposal of complaint for non-prosecution by the complainant. According Adv.Sant-Ld.Counsel for the appellant, on 16/03/2010 the complaint was fixed for hearing in the Forum below at Pune. On that day it was "Gudipadwa", a public holiday. So, the complaint was fixed for hearing on very next day i.e. 17/03/2010. On that date according to Adv.Sant, he had come to attend work at State Commission, Mumbai and his junior was to attend the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune in this complaint. According to Adv.Sant by the time his junior reached the Forum below, the matter was already disposed of by passing impugned order below Exhibit-1.
We are of the view that District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune should not have so hastily disposed of the matter on 17/03/2010. The Forum below should have at least kept this back matter for some time and Forum below would have been justified in disposing of the matter at the end of the day. But calling the matter at 10.30 a.m. sharp and immediately disposing it for non-prosecution on finding that complainant is absent, is something which is per se unjust and improper. The complainant was prosecuting the complaint since from it was filed i.e. 23/03/2008 and one fine morning, when the complainant was absent on 17/03/2010 at one stroke of pen the Forum below has disposed of the complaint observing that complaint is not prosecuting said litigation. This is surely a bad order passed by the Forum below and it will have to be quashed and set aside to give justice to the parties.
Adv.Mr.S.Hussain fairly conceded that said dismissal is unjustified. Hence, we pass the following order:-
:-ORDER-:
1. Appeal is allowed.
2. Impugned order dated 17/03/2010 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pune is hereby quashed and set aside.
3. The complaint is remitted back to the Forum below for deciding it on merit.
4. Both the parties are directed to appear in the Forum below on 04/10/2010.
5. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
6. Copies of the order herein be furnished to the parties.
Pronounced Dated the 01 September 2010 [Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar] PRESIDING MEMBER [Hon'ble Mrs. S.P.Lale] Member