State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Shriram Trans Ports Finance vs Om Prakash on 18 July, 2016
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UP C-1 Vikrant Khand 1 (Near Shaheed Path), Gomti Nagar Lucknow-226010 Revision Petition No. RP/175/2015 (Arisen out of Order Dated 24/09/2015 in Case No. C/165/2015 of District Agra-I) 1. Shriram Trans Ports Finance Sultanpur ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Om Prakash Agra ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN PRESIDENT For the Petitioner: For the Respondent: Dated : 18 Jul 2016 Final Order / Judgement STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW REVISION NO. 175 OF 2015 (Against order dated 24-09-2015 in Complaint Case No. 165/2015 of the District Consumer Forum-I, Agra ) Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited Civil Lines, Sultanpur. Through its Authorized Representative ...Revisionist Vs. Om Prakash, S/o Ram Murat R/o Village Bhaluwahi Badarpur Janpad Agra ...Opposite Party BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTER HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT HON'BLE MR. MAHESH CHAND, MEMBER
For the Revisionist : Sri Manu Dixit, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Sri Sushil Kumar Sharma, Advocate. Dated :18-07-2016 JUDGMENT MR. JUSTICE A. H. KHAN, PRESIDENT (ORAL)
Present revision has been filed under Section 17(b) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against order dated 24-09-2015 passed by District Consumer Forum-I, Agra in Complaint No. 165/2015 Om Prakash V/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited and another.
Revisionist Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited is opposite party of said complaint and impugned order dated 24-09-2015 is an interim order whereby District Consumer Forum has directed revisionist/opposite party to release truck with papers after getting deposited Rs.50,000/- by complainant now opposite party subject to condition that revisionist/opposite party shall have right to realize remaining dues from complainant now opposite party in accordance with law. Vide impugned order learned District Consumer Forum has further directed that if the said amount i.e. Rs.50,000/- is not accepted by opposite party/revisionist, the complainant now opposite party shall deposit demand draft of said amount in the name of opposite party in District Consumer :2: Forum.
Learned Counsel Sri Manu Dixit appeared for revisionist. Learned Counsel Sri Sushil Kumar Sharma appeared for complainant/opposite party.
We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the impugned order passed by District Consumer Forum as well as papers available on record.
It is contended by learned Counsel for the revisionist that the impugned order has been passed by two members of District Consumer Forum-I, Agra in violation of provision of Section 14(2) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The above complaint was filed on 24-09-2015 in presence of President of District Consumer Forum-I, Agra but the impugned order has been passed by two members of the Forum ousting President from hearing of the case illegally and fraudulently.
It is contended by learned Counsel for the revisionist that in order dated 05-10-2015, passed by President, District Consumer Forum-I, Agra on contempt application dated 28-09-2015 moved by complainant now opposite party, in pursuance of impugned order dated 24-09-2015, the President, District Consumer Forum has called explanation from Senior Assistant to explain as to under which circumstances the case was filed without proper office report and was not put up before him for hearing on admission inspite of his presence on the Forum on said date.
It is contended by learned Counsel for the complainant/opposite party that the impugned interim order has been passed by members of the District Consumer Forum under Section 13(3B) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 and is in accordance with law.
We have considered the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties.
Section 14(2) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 provides that every proceeding referred to in sub-section (1) shall be conducted by the President of District Forum and at least one member thereof sitting together; in view of provision of sub-section 2 of Section 14 of the Act when the President of District Consumer Forum is present and available, the Forum cannot act without President. The members of the Forum cannot :3: sit to hear cases and pass order ousting President. Copy of order dated 05-10-2015 passed by President on contempt application dated 28-09-2015 moved by complainant/opposite party shows that on 24-09-2015 when impugned order dated 24-09-2015 was passed by members, the President was present and available and the impugned order has been passed by members of the Forum without President keeping him away from hearing of the case. The conduct of the members appears to be inconsistent with the provision of law. Further more impugned order has been passed by District Consumer Forum without affording opportunity of hearing to revisionist/opposite party.
In view of above, we are of the view that the impugned order should be set aside and the District Consumer Forum should be directed to pass a fresh order on application for interim relief moved by complainant/opposite party before District Consumer Forum after affording opportunity of hearing to revisionist/opposite party in accordance with law.
The facts mentioned above show that the President was present when the complaint was filed before the District Consumer Forum but the complaint was not brought into notice of President and impugned order was passed by members ousting President whereas in view of Section 14(2) of the Act the District Forum cannot act without President when the President is present and available in Forum. The impugned order has been passed by members in a suspicious manner. An enquiry is needed to enquire into the circumstances under which this impugned order has been passed against provision of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 and as to who is responsible for this illegal act.
In view of above, revision is allowed. The impugned order dated 24-09-2015 passed by District Consumer Forum-I, Agra is set aside and the District Consumer Forum-I, Agra is directed to pass fresh order on application moved by the complainant/opposite party for interim relief under Section 13(3B) after affording opportunity of hearing to both parties in accordance with law.
Registrar is directed to place copy of this order before President, State Consumer Commission on administrative side for initiating an enquiry.
:4:Parties shall appear before the District Consumer Forum-I, Agra on 08-08-2016.
Let copy of this order be made available to the parties positively within 15 days as per rules.
( JUSTICE A H KHAN ) PRESIDENT ( MAHESH CHAND ) MEMBER pnt [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN] PRESIDENT