National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Reliance Communications Ltd. vs Beena Menon on 2 September, 2015
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI FIRST APPEAL NO. 628 OF 2015 (Against the Order dated 12/05/2015 in Complaint No. 154/2012 of the State Commission Maharastra) 1. RELIANCE COMMUNICATIONS LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT H-BLOCK, 1ST FLOOR, DHIRUBHAI AMBANI KNOWLEDGE CITY, NAVI MUMBAI-400710 MAHARASHTRA ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. BEENA MENON R/O. A-303, VAIBHAV TOWER, SHANTI PARK LAYOUT, MIRA ROAD (E),DIST. THANE-401107 MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA ...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE DR. S.M. KANTIKAR, MEMBER For the Appellant : Ms. Shikha Sarin, Advocate For the Respondent : N E M O Dated : 02 Sep 2015 ORDER JUSTICE J.M. MALIK
1. Counsel for the Appellant was present. None appeared for the respondent, even after receiving Rs.10,000/- as litigation charges. The main question revolves around the controversy, whether, the Appellant/OP can file written statement after the expiry of about three years' after receipt of its service. Reliance Communications Ltd., the Appellant appeared before the State Commission on 27.08.2012. It did not file the written version and an application was moved seeking extension of time to file written version. The Appellant/OP was granted time to file written version as last chance with costs of Rs.1,000/-, payable to the Legal Aid Fund of the State Commission. The Appellant neither filed the written version nor paid the sum of Rs.1,000/-. The State Commission passed an order on 13.12.2012 and directed that the matter be proceeded without written version of the OPs.
2. In the meantime, the Appellant filed revision petition bearing No. 865 of 2013, before this Commission. The said revision petition was disposed of by this Bench, vide common order in a bunch of matters, dated 19.11.2014. Thereafter, review petition bearing No. RA/239/2014 was filed by the Reliance Communications Ltd., for review of order dated 19.11.2014. This Bench, vide its order dated 05.01.2015 granted an opportunity to the Appellant/OPs, i.e., Reliance Communications Ltd., to move an application before the State Commission for filing the written version in view of the common order passed by this Commission, on 19.11.2014.
3. The State Commission placed reliance on the celebrated authority of Dr. J. J. Merchant & Ors. Vs. Shrinath Chaturvedi III (2002 CPJ 8 (SC ) and dismissed the application.
4. We have heard the counsel for the Appellant. She vehemently argued that the Appellant was to file preliminary objections and that is why the written version was not filed.
5. This submission lacks conviction. The provisions of the Act have crystalline clarity. No scope for filing preliminary objections simpliciter has been left out. The Appellant/OP is directed to file the written version within the prescribed time limit, i.e., within 30 days from the receipt of the notice. Time is extendable by 15 days, in special circumstances, with application for extension of time, which must be moved within first 30 days, under Section 13 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
6. There lies no rub in placing preliminary objections in the written statement itself. The Appellant/OP can always request the Commission that the preliminary objections should be disposed of, first of all. This case is wee bit different from the CPC. The preliminary objections must form part of the written statement.
7. It is true that the matters remained in various Benches of this Commission. Ultimately, all those cases were consolidated to one Bench and we decided the cases finally on 19.11.2014. However, there is delay of about three years. This is well known that the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court before a larger Bench because there is a conflict of view between two, three Judges' Benches, that is why, in the case of "Kolte Patil Dev. Ltd. Vs. Bhupendra Bhandari" in Civil Appeal No. 8166 of 2014, decided by the Apex Court on 08.10.2014 , the delay of six months was condoned subject to payment of Rs.1,00,000/-. The final order to be passed by the larger Bench, i.e., more than three Judges' Bench is yet to come.
8. If we take up the case on the same criteria, the Appellant/OP will have to pay costs in the sum of about Rs.6,00,000/-. However, the matter in the present case involves a meagre sum of Rs.883.61 only. The complainant/ respondent has claimed a sum of Rs.35,00,000/-.
9. Keeping in view of all these facts and circumstances, we condone the delay subject to the Appellant/OP, depositing a sum of Rs.25,000/- with the Consumer Legal Aid Account of this Commission, within one month from today. The Appellant/OP is given liberty to file the written statement, within 30 days' from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
10. Opportunity be granted to the Appellant/OP by the State Commission after satisfying itself that the above said costs stand deposited. It is made clear that no other opportunity or even a single day would be granted, further, by the State Commission. The matter may be expedited, as early as possible.
First Appeal stands disposed of.
......................J J.M. MALIK PRESIDING MEMBER ...................... DR. S.M. KANTIKAR MEMBER