Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Kamal Kishor Architect, R/O House ... vs Chander Kishor Sharma S/O Smt. Bhawnesh ... on 18 March, 2014

  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 

 
 







 



 

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
HARYANA, PANCHKULA 

 

  

 

 Revision
Petition No.17 of 2014 

 

 Date
of Institution : 05.02.2014 

 

 Date
of Decision : 18.03.2014 

 

  

 

Kamal
Kishor Architect, r/o House No.C-226,
Pull Pehiadpur,   MB Road,
  New Delhi. 

 

Petitioner
(Opposite Party) 

 

  

 

Versus 

 

  

 

1. Chander
Kishor Sharma s/o Smt. Bhawnesh Kumari Sharma 

 

  

 

2. Smt.
Sonali Sharma w/o Chander Kishore Sharma, both r/o D-354, Gali No.4, Shiv Durga
Vihar, Lakarpur, District Faridabad. 

 

Respondents (Complainants) 

 

  

 

  

 

CORAM
: Honble
Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President 

 

 Mr.
B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member. 

Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.

 

Present : Mr. Sanjeev Gaur, Advocate for Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Kirpal Singh Rawat, Advocate for the respondents.

 

O R D E R   Justice Nawab Singh, President (Oral):

 
This revision petition has been filed against the orders dated January 08th, 2014 and January 27th, 2014 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, (for short District Forum), Faridabad, whereby petitioner was proceeded ex parte and thereafter, the application for setting aside exparte order was dismissed.

2. Chander Kishor Sharma and Smt. Sonali Sharma complainants (respondents herein) filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, before the District Forum alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party for not completing the construction work of their house.

3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that an opportunity be granted to the petitioner to file written statement and contest the complaint.

4. The case is at its initial stage. As per settled principle of law, the case should be decided on merits, rather than ex parte. Therefore, this Commission deems it appropriate to allow the petitioner to contest the complaint.

5. Accordingly, this revision petition is accepted and the orders dated January 08th, 2014 and January 27th, 2014 are set-aside subject to the cost of Rs.2,000/- to be paid to the complainants before the District Forum.

Consequently, the petitioner is accorded one opportunity to file written statement and join the proceedings.

6. The petitioner is directed to appear before the District Forum, Faridabad, on April 16th, 2014.

7. Copy of this order be sent to the District Forum forthwith.

 

Announced:

18.03.2014 (Urvashi Agnihotri) Member (B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member (Nawab Singh) President   UK