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 1, Cited by 2]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

N.K.Prakashan, S/O Late Kunjhipappu vs Surendran, Chathakudam House on 13 September, 2012

  
 Daily Order


 
		



		 






              
            	  	       Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission  Vazhuthacaud,Thiruvananthapuram             Revision Petition No. RP/12/38  (Arisen out of Order Dated 12/04/2012 in Case No. CC/10/412 of District Trissur)             1. N.K.PRAKASHAN  NADUVIL PARAMBIL HOUSE,LUCIYA ROAD,MECHERY LINE QUARTERS,CHALAKUDY  THRISSUR  KERALA ...........Appellant(s)   Versus      1. SURENDRAN  CHATHAKUDAM HOUSE,KALLUSHOP ROAD.CHALAKUDY POST  THRISSUR  KERALA ...........Respondent(s)       	    BEFORE:        SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA PRESIDING MEMBER            PRESENT:       	    ORDER   

  KERALA  STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 
 

 REVISION PETITION  38/12 
 

 ORDER DATED:13...9..12 
 

 PRESENT 
 

SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA              : HON.ACTING PRESIDENT 
 

  
 

N.K.Prakashan, s/o late Kunjhipappu,  : REVISION PETITIONER 
 

Naduvil Parambil House, 
 

  Luciya Road, Mechery Line Quarters, 
 

Chalakudy - 680307. 
 

(By Adv.K.J.Mohammed Anzar) 
 

  
 

               Vs. 
 

  
 

Surendran, Chathakudam House,        : RESPOPNDENT 
 

  Kallushop Road, Chalakudy post, 
 

Thrissur District. 
 

(By Adv.M.N.Manoj) 
 

  
 

 ORDER 
 

SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA     : HON.ACTING PRESIDENT               This revision petition filed by the revision petitioner who was the complainant in CC.No.412/2010.  The respondent is the opposite party in the above CC.412//10.  The opposite party in the above CC who was absent in the CDRF, Thrissur on the day itself for his appearance on 28.12.2010 and the Forum below set ex-parte.  He later filed an IA.96/11 in CC.412/10 to set aside his ex-parte order passed by the Forum below.  The forum below allowed on a payment of the cost of Rs.600/-.  This revision petition preferred from the above order passed in IA.96/11 in CC.412/10.

          2. On this day this revision petition came before this Commission for final hearing; both the counsel for the revision petitioner and the respondent/complainant are present and they argued their own cases in detail before this Commission.  The arguments of revision petitioner is that the Forum below exercised illegal review power to review their order and allowed the IA filed by the respondent/opposite party.

          3. The counsel submitted that under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, the Forum and Commission are not having any powers to review their own orders.  It is discussed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Rajeev Hitendra's case which a bench of  Hon'ble Supreme Court consisted of five judges  and settle this position in 18.11.2011.  By this judgment, the Forum below exercised illegal review power in this order.  He prays to set aside impugned order passed by the Forum below by allowing this revision petition.  On the other side the counsel for the respondent/opposite party submitted that what ever may be they want to get further opportunity to contest their grievances in this case before the Forum below.

          4. I heard in detail both parties there is no doubt that the Forum below legally exercised the review power by violating Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act and also disobeyed the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.  It is not fair from the part of any fact finding body including the CDRF and CDRC to disobey the directions of the apex courts.

          5. This Commission decided to setaside the impugned orders passed by the Forum below as well as set ex-parte and set aside the ex-parte order accordingly, on a condition of the payment of cost of Rs.5000/-to the respondent/complainant before the Forum below.

          In the result this revision petition is allowed and set aside the impugned orders (both set exparte, and set aside exparte against the revision petitioner) passed by the Forum below both in CC.No.412/10 and in IA.96/11 on a terms of payment of cost of Rs.5000/- payable by the revision petitioner/opposite party to the respondent/complainant.  The revision petition is disposed accordingly.  The revision petitioner can be appeared before the Forum below with ready to pay the cost of Rs.5000/- to the complainant. The CDRF, Thrissur is also directed to allow the revision petitioner/opposite party to be conducted their case before the Forum below.

 
          SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA              : HON.ACTING PRESIDENT 
 

ps
 

              [  SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA]  PRESIDING MEMBER