State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Ratha Krishnan Nayager vs Caper Travels Co. Pvt. Ltd. on 30 April, 2014
IN THE STATE COMMISSION :DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Decision: 30.4.2014 First Appeal 294/2014 Ratha Krishnan Nayager Currntly residing at 7D, Barbabra Avenue, Morehill, Benoni 1500, Sough Africa Mrs. Yvette Debroah Nayager Currntly residing at 7D, Barbabra Avenue, Morehill, Benoni 1500, Sough Africa .........APPELLANTS VS 1.
2.
3.
4.
5. Caper Travels Company Pvt. Ltd., Through its Director, Mr. Bharat Atree, having its registered office at 279/A, Masjid Moth, 2nd Floor, Sough Extn., New Delhi-110 049 Hi Life Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd., Through its Director, Mr. Bharat Atree, having its registered office at 279/A, Masjid Moth, 2nd Floor, Sough Extn., New Delhi-110 049 Mr. Vishal Jaiswal, Senior Manager, Caper Travels Company Pvt. Ltd., at 279/A, Masjid Moth, 2nd Floor, Sough Extn., New Delhi-110 049 Mr. Eftkhar Khan, Asstt. Manager Caper Travels Company Pvt. Ltd., at 279/A, Masjid Moth, 2nd Floor, Sough Extn., New Delhi-110 049 Shri Sanjeev Kaul Maharajas Express, Place of Wheel, 70, L.G.F. World Trade Centre, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110 001 ....RESPONDENTS CORAM Salma Noor, Member N P Kaushik, Member (Judicial)
1. Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?
SALMA NOOR, MEMBER
1. In a complaint case bearing No.C-417/2013 and titled as Ratha Krishnan Nayager & Ors. vs. Caper Travels Company Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. filed before District Forum-II, Udyog Sadan, Qutab Institutional Area, Delhi the Complainant absented himself from the proceedings on 24.2.2014 i.e. the date fixed for hearing, and the Forum dismissed the complaint in complainants default.
2. That is what brings the Complainant/appellant in appeal before this Commission.
3. We have heard Ms. Namrata Bhatia, Counsel for the appellant in this appeal at the admission stage itself as there was no need to hear the respondent.
4. The version of the complainant/appellant for his non appearance on 24.2.2014 before the District Forum was that the Counsel who representing the case before the Distt. Forum inadvertently noted down date as 25.2.2014 in place of 24.2.2014. Hence the default occurred. There is no plausible reason not to rely and act upon the version of the appellant. It has never been the policy of law to stifle a contest. Wherever possible, a lenient view in this regard has been recommended by the superior courts so as to enable the parties to present their cases. Matters should be decided on merits. We, therefore, allow the appeal setting aside the dismissal orders in question and remand the case back to District Forum-II, Udyog Sadan, Qutab Institutional Area, Delhi with the directions to restore the complaint to its original number and to proceed in the case according to law. The Appellant Complainant is directed to appear before the District Forum-II, Udyog Sadan, Qutab Institutional Area, Delhi on 16.7.2014.
5. A copy of this order be sent to District Forum-II, Udyog Sadan, Qutab Institutional Area, Delhi to keep it on complaint file and for compliance.
(Salma Noor) Member (N P Kaushik) Member (Judicial) Arya