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 2, Cited by 0]

National Consumer Disputes Redressal

Fca India Automobiles Private Limited vs Sohel Ismail Sheikh & 2 Ors. on 12 May, 2016

          NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION  NEW DELHI          REVISION PETITION NO. 1228 OF 2016     (Against the Order dated 13/01/2016 in Appeal No. 351/2015       of the State Commission Maharastra)        1. FCA INDIA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED  THROUGH AUTHORISED OFFICER, HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR, BENEFICE, MATHURADAS MILL COMPOUND LOWER PAREL (W)  MUMBAI  MAHARASHTRA  ...........Petitioner(s)  Versus        1. SOHEL ISMAIL SHEIKH & 2 ORS.  R/O C-4, OM GURUKUL COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIET PLOT NO. 47, SECTOR 19, NERUL,NAVI MUMBAI-400706   THANE  MAHARASHTRA  2. FORTUNE CARS PRIVATE LIMITED,  HAVING ADDRESS AT PLOT NO. D/237 AND D/400, T.T.C. INDUSTRIAL AREA, MIDC, SHIRAVANE, NAVI MUMBAI-400706  THANE  MAHARASHTRA  3. BALAJI AUTOWORLD,  HAVING  SERVICE CENTRE AT C-7/42, T.T.C. INDUSTRIAL AREA, PAWANE MIDC, TURBHE, NAVI MUMBAI-400706  THANE  MAHARASHTRA ...........Respondent(s) 

BEFORE:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN, PRESIDENT   HON'BLE MRS. M. SHREESHA, MEMBER For the Petitioner : MR. RISHAB RAJ JAIN For the Respondent :

Dated : 12 May 2016 ORDER        This Revision Petition, by FIAT Group Automobiles India Pvt. Ltd., under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"), is directed against the order, dated 13.1.2016, passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra at Mumbai (for short "the State Commission"), in R.P. No.RP/15/351.  By the impugned order, the State Commission has dismissed the Revision Petition, whereby the correctness of order, dated 6.11.2015, passed by Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai in Consumer Case No.CC/15/33, was questioned.  By the said order, the District Forum had closed the right of the Petitioner to file its Written Version in the Complaint, as the same was not filed even within the time extended, on payment of costs of  ₹500/-.

       Having heard Learned counsel for the Petitioner and perused the orders passed by the Fora below, we are of the view that the Revision Petition is without any merit.  It is not in dispute that the Written Version on behalf of the Petitioner, Opposite Party No.1 in the Complaint, was not filed within the statutory period of 45 days.  That being so, in the light of the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. - AIR 2016 SC 86, no fault can be found with the impugned order, warranting our interference in Revisional Jurisdiction.

       Consequently, the Revision Petition fails and is dismissed accordingly.

 

       However, it will be open to the Petitioner to participate in the proceedings in Consumer Complaint No.33/2015, to the extent permissible in law.

  ......................J D.K. JAIN PRESIDENT ...................... M. SHREESHA MEMBER