State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Shaji V.John, vs P.T. Varkey, S/O Thomas, on 12 March, 2012
Daily Order
Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Vazhuthacaud,Thiruvananthapuram Revision Petition No. RP/12/5 (Arisen out of Order Dated 05/03/2011 in Case No. CC/09/191 of District Alappuzha) 1. Shaji V John Maieco Constructions Pvt Ltd,Mannil Enclaves,Govt Hospital Jn,Chengannur Pathanamthitta Kerala ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. P T Varkey Poikayil Puthen Banglaw,Thittamel,Chengannur Pathanamthitta Kerala ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HONARABLE MR. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU PRESIDENT PRESENT: ORDER
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
REVISION PETITION.05/12
ORDER DATED : 12.03.2012
PRESENT:
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT
SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER
Shaji V.John, Managing director, Maieco Constructions Pvt Ltd., : REVISION PETITIONER Mannil Enclaves, Government Hospital Junction, Chengannur.
(By Adv: Sri.Anilkumar A.S.) Vs. P.T. Varkey, S/o Thomas, Poikayil Puthen Banglaw, : COUNTER PETITIONER Thittamel.P.O, Chengannur. (By Adv: sri.Vinoy Varghese) ORDER JUSTICE SHRI.K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT
The revision petitioner is the opposite party in CC.191/09 in the file of CDRF, Alappuzha. The order sought to be revised is the one issued in I.A.202/11 filed by the revision petitioner for allowing to cross-examine the complainant. The Forum relying on the decisions in Mani Square Ltd. Vs. Vinitha Agrawal (1) 2010 CPJ 150 (NC) and the decision in Dr.J.J.Merchant and Ors. Vs. Shrinath Chaturvedi III (2002) CPJ 8 (SC) held that there is no inevitable circumstances in the case for the opposite party to cross-examine the complainant and directed that the opposite party may file counter affidavit.
2. It is the contention of the revision petitioner that rejection of his request for cross examination will cause irreparable loss and injury.
3. We find that the matter in dispute before the Forum is with respect to the construction of a building entrusted width the revision petitioner. It is not stated in what way the revision petitioner will be prejudiced if the complainant is not cross-examined. Further it is mentioned in the revision petition itself that the counsel could not be present as he was laid up on the date posted for evidence.
4. We find that the CP Act envisages expeditious disposal of the cases filed ie within 90 days and if laboratory examinations etc are required within 150 days. The procedure envisaged under the statute is a summary one. The consumer Fora is at liberty to regulate the procedure. Sec.13(4) (III) empowers the Fora to receive evidence on affidavits. Cross-examination in every matter and cross-examination that is not required for the proper adjudication of the matter are not conceived by the statute. The Supreme Court in Malaykumar Ganguly Vs. Sukumar Mukherji and Ors. (Civil Appeal Nos.1191-1194/05) and in Dr.J.J.Merchant Vs. Shrinath Chaturvedi (supra) and the National Commission in Manisquare Ltd's case (supra) has affirmed some what impliedly the above aspects. It has been held that in the above cases where a party wanted to bring out certain facts he can submit interrogatories and reply to the interrogatories on affidavits should be taken on record first instead of permitting lengthy cross-examination. We find that the same principle applies in the instant case as well. The CDRF is empowered to examine the matter and decide as to whether cross-examination is required or not. Of course the order of the Forum is not specific in this regard. All the same we find that no interference in the order of the Forum is called for specially in view of the fact that it is summary procedure that is envisaged in the Act with the objective of quick and fast disposal of the cases. Hence revision petition is dismissed with direction that the revision petitioner may file interrogatories for the specific matters sought to be brought out.
In the result the revision petition is dismissed as above.
JUSTICE K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER VL.
[HONARABLE MR. JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU] PRESIDENT